Is it time for a New State of New England/Hunter Valley??

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

My orginal post to this thread started the idea of getting rid of state governemnts and having large regional councils.

I live in north QLD where the idea of a seperate state has been mooted for decades simply because the State Government doesnt look past the South Eastern part of the state.

The majority of QLD revenue comes from anywhere north of Gladstone and yet most of the budget is spend in the south eastern area of QLD.

Our Hospital here is dangerously understaffed (the staff are great no two ways about it), we lack Police (by as much as 70 officers), our roads are substandard, most of the states policy is centered around the south east.

We get a pityfull amount of money allocated to us for any "good" projects, yet we get money given to us for "dumb" projects just to appease the morons and those lacking in any form of IQ

All of this sounds familier doesnt it?

What will state hood achieve?
Nothing
We dont have the population base (nor does Tasmania) to warrant the massive expense to start a new state, nor do we have anyone with any intelligence here to run for a newly set up parliament (and how do i know this? simply by looking at the candidates that run for council here, who are hoplessly ignorant, pathetic, lack any form of vision, who couldnt run a chook raffle if it meant saving their lives)

We have too much government as it is, too much red tape, too many laws and bylaws, too much wasted money.

Look at Europe, how many countries there have 3 levels of Government?
They run just fine without the states.
And they have countries with tripple our population, yet here we are with 28million (?) people and we have 3 levels of government.

If I was to fork out money to change things, Id rather it be to remove the States and have regional councils which had its own federal representative who sat in federal parliament so he/she would then be somewhat more accountable.

Exactly, a solution I would rather see. To me this will limit the red tape and limit the public servants we pay for etc Plus it will unify the nation in terms of services such as power and water as well as simplify the justice system with one set of laws.

Then the Hunter regional council,Bundaberg regional council and Pilbara regional council will have just as much say as Sydney, Brisbane and Perth with less expense to the tax payer. Like has been said, it works all through Europe.

[banarcus]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Exactly, a solution I would rather see. To me this will limit the red tape and limit the public servants we pay for etc Plus it will unify the nation in terms of services such as power and water as well as simplify the justice system with one set of laws.

Then the Hunter regional council,Bundaberg regional council and Pilbara regional council will have just as much say as Sydney, Brisbane and Perth with less expense to the tax payer. Like has been said, it works all through Europe.

I dont see the point of replacing Sydney with Canberra. Over the last 100 years, we have seen Canberra become more powerful than ever. Some see that as a good thing. Now imagine smaller population regional councils compared to places under an existing state government. I can't see the Pilbara better off with Canberra as a substitute for Perth.

As for the references to European nations, many have provinces and states. France, Germany, Italy and Spain are just a handful that have states and councils too. The difference is that those countries aren't the size of Australia with spread out outposts that we call capital cities. Anything in between those capital cities here in Australia miss out.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by banarcus

I dont see the point of replacing Sydney with Canberra. Over the last 100 years, we have seen Canberra become more powerful than ever. Some see that as a good thing. Now imagine smaller population regional councils compared to places under an existing state government. I can't see the Pilbara better off with Canberra as a substitute for Perth.

As for the references to European nations, many have provinces and states. France, Germany, Italy and Spain are just a handful that have states and councils too. The difference is that those countries aren't the size of Australia with spread out outposts that we call capital cities. Anything in between those capital cities here in Australia miss out.

Italy does not have states, it has provincial councils.

Im also sure Spain has.. provincial councils... and no states.

France does not have states, just more "regions" or provincial government.

Um Germany has states!

Not to mention their population base is quite larger then ours

[geckoGT]

I also think the physical size of Australia may have been a problem for effective government back in 1901.

Right now with jet aircraft, the motor vehicle, email, internet and telephones it may not be such an issue.

[Keepleft]

The 'get rid of the States' bandwagon is a simplistic outlook utterly devoid of this countries historical and legal realities.

The idea of what would be a BIG central communist/socialist/leftie uber republican federal government, resplendent with the inevitable leftie 'bill of rights and wrongs', coupled with pumped-up Council minions, is not what this increasingly angry country needs.

We are Australian's, but we are not culturally in a domestic sense 'the same'.

NSW will remain, but I do support, a New England State:-) To help mitigate the damage done by city based labor/Resistance socialists.

Tick tick tick it goes.

And remember, 'few' are truely your mates these days. It is time NSW raise its Light Horse police militia - I propose surrounding Canberra and placement of same along the Victorian border:-)

Politically, my signal to Canberra is; "Go to Buggary".

[banarcus]

Hey guys, there are others that have a different solution to the problem of capital city states that we have today.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busi...-1225850074371

Note comment 35 of 40:

"The idea of decentralising population centres and moving the NSW capital has ALOT of merit. Incidentally it was proposed nearly 40 years ago to have Newcastle become the capital of a new state called New England. As it stands, the Hunter region (both lower & upper, Lake Macquarie, Port Stephens & Maitland) has 10% of the NSW population, provides 22% of the GDP, 30% of the exports & $600M in mineral royalties. When it comes to services such as policing, health, education, art, roads & courts our return is on these metrics a pathetic 2-5%. Pathetic. Propping up Sydney should no longer be tolerated. We deserve our fair share or a new state. Or even no states altogether.

Our forefathers believed that we would have more states that what we started off with at the time of Federation. As regions grew, they envisioned more states so that each region, as it grew, was to be established as a new state within the Commonwealth. This is what regional government in todays language meant in 1901, more states to represent regional growth and identity. More "regional governments" to represent growing regional populations.

[Jim Goose]

The idea of what would be a BIG central communist/socialist/leftie uber republican federal government, resplendent with the inevitable leftie 'bill of rights and wrongs', coupled with pumped-up Council minions, is not what this increasingly angry country needs.

Simplistic???? Kettle meet pot.....

So a country without states is "a commie" country???

Please tell me which European country is exactly "communist" and its history.
I Just posted that Italy, France, Spain do not have states.... So they are commies?

Please tell us all then what this country needs?
I dont see you providing us "commies" with an alternative?

Well speak up, we are all listening......

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by banarcus

Hey guys, there are others that have a different solution to the problem of capital city states that we have today.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busi...-1225850074371

Note comment 35 of 40:

"The idea of decentralising population centres and moving the NSW capital has ALOT of merit. Incidentally it was proposed nearly 40 years ago to have Newcastle become the capital of a new state called New England. As it stands, the Hunter region (both lower & upper, Lake Macquarie, Port Stephens & Maitland) has 10% of the NSW population, provides 22% of the GDP, 30% of the exports & $600M in mineral royalties. When it comes to services such as policing, health, education, art, roads & courts our return is on these metrics a pathetic 2-5%. Pathetic. Propping up Sydney should no longer be tolerated. We deserve our fair share or a new state. Or even no states altogether.

Our forefathers believed that we would have more states that what we started off with at the time of Federation. As regions grew, they envisioned more states so that each region, as it grew, was to be established as a new state within the Commonwealth. This is what regional government in todays language meant in 1901, more states to represent regional growth and identity. More "regional governments" to represent growing regional populations.

I have no arguments there, however a small "state" would bog down simply because it cant support the paper weights required for a council and state in a small area. Its a duplication not worth paying for.

Regional government is worth a go, as the current system is killing us.

[banarcus]

Here is another story from the Newcastle Herald:

http://www.theherald.com.au/news/loc...px?storypage=0

THE State Government has pocketed more than $1.4 billion from Hunter-based authorities in taxes and dividends over the past two years, as crucial projects continue to go unfunded in the region.

A Herald investigation has found that State-owned authorities paid more than $614 million in taxes and a further $831 million in shareholder dividends to the Government in the past two financial years. The majority of money, or $799,412,000 was collected from Macquarie Generation, which runs Bayswater and Liddell power stations in the Upper Hunter.

Under the National Tax Equivalent Regime, which was set up to establish a level playing field for business, government-owned authorities are taxed at federal income tax rates.

Hunter Business Chamber chief executive officer Peter Shinnick said the Hunter had been neglected by the State Government for more than a decade. Mr Shinnick said as the Hunter was home to 10 per cent of the state's population it should receive 10 per cent of all funding allocations, including those collected from the taxes and dividends. He said a review of budgets over the past 10 years gave a clear picture the region was not receiving anywhere near its fair share of funding. "You have to question whether Labor considers it needs to spend money in the Hunter," Mr Shinnick said. "The Labor Government has been in power for the past 16 years and for the last 10 years the Hunter Region has not received its fair share in terms of allocation and they need to be held accountable for it."

The $1.4 billion was collected from Hunter Water, Newcastle Port Corporation, Eraring Energy, Macquarie Generation and a portion from EnergyAustralia, representing its Hunter client base. It does not include coal royalties collected by the State Government from the region, which totalled about $1 billion last year, or more than $45 million paid by Hunter residents in waste levies over the past three financial years.

Minister for the Hunter Jodi McKay said the Hunter was a key contributor to the NSW economy due to its diverse range of industry and business. Ms McKay acknowledged the Upper Hunter got little in return for supporting the coal industry. "The Hunter has received increased government funding in successive budgets," she said. "However I will continue to fight to ensure we receive our fair share of funds for front-line services and infrastructure."

Mr Shinnick said a review of the past decade's state budgets found on average 3 per cent funding on Hunter schools and community services, 5.6 per cent on health and 1.9 per cent on the region's courts. "The constant debate over the condition of the state courts is totally justified when less than 2 per cent of Attorney-General's funding comes to the Hunter," he said. "Lots of other very similar conclusions can be drawn."

[banarcus]

Well it seems years and years of resentment and non representation as well as exploitation has finally culminated in North Queensland saying enough is enough. This is what the colonies of Moreton Bay and Port Phillip Bay(Brisbane and Melbourne) wanted when they were being mis-represented by the colonial government in Sydney. Decentralisation in 2010 has something in common with decentralisation back in the 1800s.

http://www.news.com.au/national/nort...-1225903251638

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/...10/2978401.htm

It makes sense really. It isn't a question of greed as many would put it. It's a question of people in the North of Queensland sick of not being governed properly year after year despite many broken promises.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by banarcus

Well it seems years and years of resentment and non representation as well as exploitation has finally culminated in North Queensland saying enough is enough. This is what the colonies of Moreton Bay and Port Phillip Bay(Brisbane and Melbourne) wanted when they were being mis-represented by the colonial government in Sydney. Decentralisation in 2010 has something in common with decentralisation back in the 1800s.

http://www.news.com.au/national/nort...-1225903251638

http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/...10/2978401.htm

It makes sense really. It isn't a question of greed as many would put it. It's a question of people in the North of Queensland sick of not being governed properly year after year despite many broken promises.

I live in North QLD and was born here.
Yes we are the "forgotten" part of the state I agree 100%.
But there is no way in the world that a new state will change anything.
The people calling for a new state have their own agenda and are empire building.

The BILLIONS to set it all up will be a disgusting amount of money in anyones language.

Next is the point which EVERYONE overlooks....
We currently have on ALL sides of politics, "morons".
Its that simple.
Now think about it, these are the BEST the parties could find in the entire state.
How in the hell are we going to find anyone capable to run another state if the current crop of morons is the BEST we can dish up?

One more point:
Townsville (where i live) is being pushed as the capitol.
Fair crack of the whip.
I have watched this town become a rat race.
From around the year 2000 it went downhill.
The respective councils of Townsville and the former Thuringowa did NOT ONE thing in infrastructure here.

Our roads are clogged.
Our dam is too small.
We have no public transport to speak of.
Our Hospital is too small
We lack proper Police numbers
Our roads are crap (Did I mention our roads are crap?)
And we have the biggest bunch of morons in the councils who are even worse then the previous moron we had leading the council.

Council has rubber stamped housing development like no tomorrow and has wasted rate payer money on useless projects and ideas.

We have the highest rental cost outside of Sydney!
We are the most expensive in Australia in our rates.
And buying a house here in Townsville is impossible as it was deemed to be the most expensive and unaffordable town outside Sydney.

So again, the real issues are ignored and instead we are blinded be delusions of grandure by people who think becoming our own state will "fix" our problems..

As I proposed in my previous threads we need to abolish the states and form regional goverment. It works in Europe.

We dont need more red tape....

[banarcus]

Who will be the leader/s of said Regional Governments, especially in Queensland? The empire builders that you speak of, who are they, councillors, big business, existing state MPs? Many of the people who are asking for this are the little people who want new hospitals, more police, better roads etc which are all existing state responsibilities.

What is the difference between regional governments and state governments? Regional governments as in forced council amalgamations and abolition of existing state governments? Where does the revenue come from for regional government? Do regional governments compete with one another just like city based MPs do with country/regional based MPs? I'm not being smart, just asking questions.

People see existing state governments as inefficient, money hungry and wasteful beasts but how about your existing state government base itself in a regional non metropolitan area where office space is cheap, transport is cheap and beauracracy is cheaper than being based in a metrocentic area. Canberra is a good example of this where a new town was created as a capital and a base for the running and administration of government.

The creation of new states is to create better representation and to be in control of its own spending whilst generating money for better infastructure and services.

Those calling for the abolition of the existing states say this because their state goverment have largely failed them and because Canberra has tightened its grip on national revenue raising at the expense of the states ie, income tax, GST and of course the proposed super mining tax.

[Jim Goose]

Going back to what I had posted when the thread started...

I dont think the constitution allows for the abolishment of the states.
I dont know if that applies to actual parliament or not.
But in order to kepp the maps the same, postcodes etc.... the state boundaries remain.

We still use "parishes", so then the state name remains.

The idea of the regional council/ government (yes a mega council of sorts) would be bigger in area then some current council areas (at least here in QLD).

The region is then divided into local electorates (which were abolished with our forced council amalgamation) so that there is a local member on the regional council board.

Now obviously each region will have a governor/ mayor whatever tittle you give him.
Each region then also shares the same boundary with a federal seat.
So then each region then has a federal representative in parliament.

It would yes mean more seats in parliament obviously.. but at least your area has a direct representative in federal parliament.

Funding would be based on the current GST funding the states receive with minor regional differences obviously. Each member obviously bids and makes his case for extra funding for projects etc..

The Hospitals would be federally funded but run locally by their own regional hospital board.
Police would be federally funded.
Fire and Ambulance could revert back to the good old days of when they were almost funded and run locally.
Schools would be federally funded also.
The National Highway is already mostly Federally funded.

One national drivers licence
One national rego for cars

Like I said it works in Europe

[Jim Goose]

The creation of new states is to create better representation and to be in control of its own spending whilst generating money for better infastructure and services.

Like I said previously....

We currently are unable to find any real people with any brains on all sides of politics to run this state... Forming another state means we will need a new premier and all new ministers.

Who are the parties going to field?
The morons they have now are the best they can find?

We cant even find a good mayor here!
For the past 15yrs here in Townsville NO ONE has run in the elections to run for Mayor, except the current Mayor we have.

I dont think the Nationals (now LMP) have fielded a candidate here in that time and I think the Libs have contested once or twice in that time.

Once or twice we may get an unkown independant who appears 5days before the election.

Now think we are asking that people to front up to run a new state??
They arent even interested (or are so inept) in even running for mayor here.

Like I said we dont have the infrastructure here to become the capitol.
Nor do Cairns, Mackay or Rockhampton.

Abolishing the state means one less teir of red tape...

[banarcus]

I like your ideas regarding the regional governments. So long as the regional governments are not drowned out by bigger metrocentric governments then we can aim for equality.

Something has to change. Big cities are too expensive for this country to manage. Just look at the latest pork barrel job that Gillard has proposed with the Sydney government. $2billion on a short railway link where the majority of the cash would go to buy properties along the route. The costs are massive.

The capital cities and I mention Sydney in particular, need to shed their population with existing metropolitan governments creating incentives for regional Australia to grow. Businesses follow people.

For example, take Bathurst NSW and base the NSW parliament there. Jobs and services will follow to support the influx of people that move there. Business is encouraged to base itself there and so on.

Also finally, Jim you make more sense with your against than what people in your Brisbane government do. Some of the more senior politicians rubbish the idea of secession as silly because it will mean that NSW will beat QLD in the origin. They treat the whole idea as playground small talk and basically write off the idea as silly. Just like they are treating the people of the north as second class citizens. I'd take a punt that they would also write off the idea of regional based governments too as silly and extreme. This is the sort of metrocentric mentality that regional people have to live with.

[castellan]

Jim Goose.
"Abolishing the states means one less tier of red tape".
Yes and that is about it.
The rest of what your on about is a load of hog wash.
Incompetence is incompetence!
No one in there right mind would stand for mayor or politician because if they did they would be hounded down, just like Sir Joh was and no one can say that he was incompetent, and that is a fact that no one can deny.

But we have to endure these polished university educated twits that have not the foggiest of reality.

But i would say they must of came top of there class in the art of being a first class con artist.
And that is the main job description for the application of becoming a leader of a political party now days. as well as in a lot of business positions as well sadly now days. SICK!

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by banarcus

Hey guys, there are others that have a different solution to the problem of capital city states that we have today.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busi...-1225850074371

Note comment 35 of 40:

"The idea of decentralising population centres and moving the NSW capital has ALOT of merit. Incidentally it was proposed nearly 40 years ago to have Newcastle become the capital of a new state called New England. As it stands, the Hunter region (both lower & upper, Lake Macquarie, Port Stephens & Maitland) has 10% of the NSW population, provides 22% of the GDP, 30% of the exports & $600M in mineral royalties. When it comes to services such as policing, health, education, art, roads & courts our return is on these metrics a pathetic 2-5%. Pathetic. Propping up Sydney should no longer be tolerated. We deserve our fair share or a new state. Or even no states altogether.

Our forefathers believed that we would have more states that what we started off with at the time of Federation. As regions grew, they envisioned more states so that each region, as it grew, was to be established as a new state within the Commonwealth. This is what regional government in todays language meant in 1901, more states to represent regional growth and identity. More "regional governments" to represent growing regional populations.

That person you quoted knew what they were on about! It was me

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by castellan

Jim Goose.
"Abolishing the states means one less tier of red tape".
Yes and that is about it.
The rest of what your on about is a load of hog wash.
Incompetence is incompetence!
No one in there right mind would stand for mayor or politician because if they did they would be hounded down, just like Sir Joh was and no one can say that he was incompetent, and that is a fact that no one can deny.

But we have to endure these polished university educated twits that have not the foggiest of reality.

But i would say they must of came top of there class in the art of being a first class con artist.
And that is the main job description for the application of becoming a leader of a political party now days. as well as in a lot of business positions as well sadly now days. SICK!

Umm and your alternative is what??
God I love how people get shot down and told its hogwash and yet your unable to provide an idea or alternative.

Let me say it again..... It works in Europe.

One less teir of government (the STATE) also means the money goes DIRECTLY to each region.
Gee fancy that... money GOING DIRECTLY to the region.
Then again I guess I am speaking all hogwash....

Still I'll await your alternative.... and an explanation on what is hogwash.
Exactly how?

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by banarcus

I like your ideas regarding the regional governments. So long as the regional governments are not drowned out by bigger metrocentric governments then we can aim for equality.

Something has to change. Big cities are too expensive for this country to manage. Just look at the latest pork barrel job that Gillard has proposed with the Sydney government. $2billion on a short railway link where the majority of the cash would go to buy properties along the route. The costs are massive.

The capital cities and I mention Sydney in particular, need to shed their population with existing metropolitan governments creating incentives for regional Australia to grow. Businesses follow people.

For example, take Bathurst NSW and base the NSW parliament there. Jobs and services will follow to support the influx of people that move there. Business is encouraged to base itself there and so on.

Also finally, Jim you make more sense with your against than what people in your Brisbane government do. Some of the more senior politicians rubbish the idea of secession as silly because it will mean that NSW will beat QLD in the origin. They treat the whole idea as playground small talk and basically write off the idea as silly. Just like they are treating the people of the north as second class citizens. I'd take a punt that they would also write off the idea of regional based governments too as silly and extreme. This is the sort of metrocentric mentality that regional people have to live with.

Mate regional centers have always been the poor neighbours of each state capitol city.
Up until the 1980s we still had single lane bridges here!
Yes our great national highway had timber single lane bridges in the 1980s!
It was great to see how the government would assigning a great deal of money to roads and rail system in the capitol while the rest of the state looked like it was still in the 19th centuary.

Regional centres are getting smaller as there is no incentives to stay, even when a good proposal appears to create work, its knocked on the head cause your a small community.
Schools close because the state doesnt want to keep it open because there is only 5 kids there and there is a school 50-60km away.
Imagine if kids in Brisbane, Sydney etc were told sorry you have to travel 60km each day to go to school??

Thread after thread are started on here with people constantly telling us how poorly their state gov runs things... something has to change.

Just think.. no more state politics.. no more state parties or elections.

[SteveJH]

I don't know if this has been suggested, but I'd suggest a major rethink of taxes, and how different things are funded between state/federal. For example originally Excise was a federal tax, and income tax was a state tax.

I don't care if its collected by a central office, but it should be distributed in the proportions that its collected. Same for GST.

None of this cr@p like a couple of months ago like with the health system. "The states can't pay for this but we can". So how do they pay for it? they take more GST money off the states and put it into the health system.

Remembering that most of the states are already running budget deficits, this means that these states are now either even more in the red, or are forced to redirect money from other funding areas. for example roads, state forrests, etc. It also puts more pressure on them to collect more revenue, like speed camera's, fishing licenses, gun licenses or whatever.

[banarcus]

Jim, you have to agree that the status quo is killing this country.

The best way to bring the issues to the politicians and general public is to make a big noise such as seceding.

PM sent phillyc

Too true SteveJH

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Umm and your alternative is what??
God I love how people get shot down and told its hogwash and yet your unable to provide an idea or alternative.

Let me say it again..... It works in Europe.

One less teir of government (the STATE) also means the money goes DIRECTLY to each region.
Gee fancy that... money GOING DIRECTLY to the region.
Then again I guess I am speaking all hogwash....

Still I'll await your alternative.... and an explanation on what is hogwash.
Exactly how?

Having a state gov really cost f all.
The money saved means f all, if there incompetent.
It works in Europe. no one is saying it can't work. it worked in Hitlers Germany to mate.
By rights we should have a healthy democracy with state powers. it's a insurance policy against toss pot dictators mate.

I have a mate that carries on just like you who is a member in the liberal party. all he raves on about is saving money but can't see anything other than money! and he should know better because his parents had to leave there country, because of dictators.
The "alternative" is there is nothing wrong with the states that we have but it's the half wits running it that are fools.
Like i said incompetence is incompetence, do i have to explain that to ya. changing the goal post won't fix anything.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Mate regional centers have always been the poor neighbours of each state capitol city.
Up until the 1980s we still had single lane bridges here!
Yes our great national highway had timber single lane bridges in the 1980s!
It was great to see how the government would assigning a great deal of money to roads and rail system in the capitol while the rest of the state looked like it was still in the 19th centuary.

Regional centres are getting smaller as there is no incentives to stay, even when a good proposal appears to create work, its knocked on the head cause your a small community.
Schools close because the state doesnt want to keep it open because there is only 5 kids there and there is a school 50-60km away.
Imagine if kids in Brisbane, Sydney etc were told sorry you have to travel 60km each day to go to school??

Thread after thread are started on here with people constantly telling us how poorly their state gov runs things... something has to change.

Just think.. no more state politics.. no more state parties or elections.

People telling us how poorly their state gov runs things?
Not to mention the federal gov mate, don't forget that!

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by castellan

Having a state gov really cost f all.
The money saved means f all, if there incompetent.
It works in Europe. no one is saying it can't work. it worked in Hitlers Germany to mate.
By rights we should have a healthy democracy with state powers. it's a insurance policy against toss pot dictators mate.

I have a mate that carries on just like you who is a member in the liberal party. all he raves on about is saving money but can't see anything other than money! and he should know better because his parents had to leave there country, because of dictators.
The "alternative" is there is nothing wrong with the states that we have but it's the half wits running it that are fools.
Like i said incompetence is incompetence, do i have to explain that to ya. changing the goal post won't fix anything.

You have read what the thread is about?

Liberal party? and?
Utterly amazing.....
(sorry but in case you missed all the other idiotic posts, I have been called a commie and now you using a Liberal parralel?)
In any case, this isnt about Party polictics...

Again you havent told me which bit is hogwash.
Usually when you debate/ bring your point across is to come up with something valid in order to show how the other guy is wrong etc....

The best you can do is Germany and Hitler?

I'll say it again, it works in Europe.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by banarcus

Jim, you have to agree that the status quo is killing this country.

The best way to bring the issues to the politicians and general public is to make a big noise such as seceding.

PM sent phillyc

Too true SteveJH

Hell yes I agree.
A change is needed, the status quo doesnt work.
Seemingly some would prefer the "bush" fend for itself and be ripped off.

Ok if you try to form a state is there legislation/ law that requires a municipality (regional council) to be formed ? Can the state function as the council administrator?

I know for a fact that here in QLD the state can sack an entire council and install state run administration if it sees the council not doing a good enough job or there is mass corruption etc etc....

How big would the Hunter Valley state be?

And yes we need to make more noise, in order to show the state they cant keep treating the regional areas as the poorer relative of the state capitol.

I think however a lot of the population are conditioned (?) into thinking that speaking out is bad these days, or they have given up?

[xtremerus]

Calling for the abolition of the States is a bit like the tail wagging the dog. The Australian Federal Gov't only exists because it is a Federation of the States.
More States can be accepted into the Federation.
Re-writing the complete Aust. constitution without states would be an exercise in futility, and disagreement.
Just look at the relatively minor changes needed to the Constitution in the past Republic debate. No-one could agree.

[Jim Goose]

And the states are past their used by date...
They are only exsisting to serve the people in their respective capitol city and dont care about anything past its city boundary.

Just because its "too hard" does it mean we give up?

[xtremerus]

I agree with you.
But the Feds would just set up just as big a bureaucatic system to replace the abolished states, as it could not handle local issues from Camberra

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

I agree with you.
But the Feds would just set up just as big a bureaucatic system to replace the abolished states, as it could not handle local issues from Camberra

Yes but that is the idea of having a regional government/ council.
It would take care of the same thing that councils provide now and a few other things.
They would still collect rates, building permits etc... keep the usual council by-laws etc...

The region would then get its GST money direct from the Federal Government.

Yes convincing the polititions would be difficult (though im sure some local ones would be interested). However if you got the majority of Australians behind the idea and yelled loud enough im sure it would happen (thats the hard bit!)

Yes its all pie in the sky.. but one has to dream sometimes??

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

You have read what the thread is about?

Liberal party? and?
Utterly amazing.....
(sorry but in case you missed all the other idiotic posts, I have been called a commie and now you using a Liberal parralel?)
In any case, this isnt about Party polictics...

Again you havent told me which bit is hogwash.
Usually when you debate/ bring your point across is to come up with something valid in order to show how the other guy is wrong etc....

The best you can do is Germany and Hitler?

I'll say it again, it works in Europe.

There are a type of liberal socialist out there, you know the extreme right wing type that like everything done there way to suit their own personal benefit and that's all. like the last liberal that got the boot.

You are politically naive. and i never said it can not work. it's just that type of system is inferior to our system, as to a healthy democracy.

If you can remember back when we had a lunatic running the federal gov in Australia. we hear in QLD had a premier that told the moron where he could go and stated our states rights.

Now if we had your inferior system do you think these small voices could stand up to such a powerful creatine.

The changes you are on about has everything to do about politics. you think you can con people into thinking, it's just a progressive evolving concept. and ours is of no merit and old hat.