The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > You are the Prime Minister

You are the Prime Minister

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All
I note several suggestion already made are merely political and an expense and does nothing for any real benifit for Australian productivity and development to create wealth or employment.

Mine would be:
1. Build transport lanes for better movement of goods - rail and heavy roads.
2. Build nuclear, wind and solar power stations in country areas,
to decentralise industry across the country and reduce pressure on Cities.
3. Establish public works to pump water into central Australian river systems from the North to increase land productivity. Construct more weirs and dams.
4. Classify all land use suitable for agriculture [not allow any other use or sale to foreign countries], timbered areas grow more dedicated hardwood and softwood forests, housing [none in areas of 1 in a 100 year flood levels], tourism and sport[retain suitable areas for exclusive use], mining [only in undeveloped areas].
Posted by Philo, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 8:20:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is no time to talk about things. Its time to DO things.

1. Take all necessary steps to ensure that a soundly based renewable energy industry can thrive with certainty. Loan guarantees would be a major component.

2. Make it impossible to construct buildings of any description that were inefficient with energy usage.

3. Ensure that biologically based transport fuels, especially for agriculture were developed as urgently as possible, and ensuring that the energy balance was as near neutral as it can be.
Posted by renew, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 8:25:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's a good idea not to build houses in creek beds and flood plains Lexi. Your 'flood fund', is it going to extend to a 'fire fund' and an 'earthquake fund' as well?

If so, just how many jamjars do you think we should fill with ATO monies to keep 'disaster' way?

Houellebecq,I detect grim humour in your post, as I recognised the status quo so loved by governments of all hues, particularly current ALP ones, who so enjoy dismantling what the ALP once stood for.

As for the 'republic' Lexi- are you going to support a republic of the people, or the one the Pellites and Eureka Street apologists are hankering for, a republic with God at the top, just like we have now?

I'd hope you'd expect a genuine republic with a separation of church FROM state, for ever.

And, do humour me, having done away with the Keneally's and Blighs (and the WA and others types of course) of this world (I'd be happy with that) just who do you think would emerge from the slime?

We'd be back to the same troglodytes we have now, wouldn't we?
Posted by The Blue Cross, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 8:29:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Houellebecq,you have pinched Mr Howard's policies.
Posted by Flo, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 8:37:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
TBC:

Thank You for such an emotive response to my suggestions. I'll try to answer your questions. We've all seen from past events that it's not a good idea to build houses in creekbeds and flood plains - it is unfortunate that people choose to live in dangerous areas, and councils allow them to do so. There are mechanical means to control water - such as dams, canals, pumping stations, designated areas for flood basins, levee banks et cetera., therefore one of my policies was to implement a program allocate funds and try to control and minimise flood disasters in the future. I did not mention other diasters simply because the other diasters you mentioned - like fire and earthquakes cannot be mechanical controlled to the extent that water can. But as you know for fire - there are management plans in place for the control of undergrowth, back burning, fire-breaks, efficient fire-fighting services, a network of communication to inform the districts of impending threats. Unfortunately the communication network in the last Victorian fires broke down. Earthquakes are monitored in critical areas (eg. in California) they can be anticipated. Australia unfortunately has no such means - and so far doesn't appear to need it. You ask, "How many jam-jars do you think we should fill with ATO monies to keep "disaster" away?" I'm not an economist - and would have to ask for advice on that one - and come up with the best possible solution for the good of the nation -
it would also depend on the government's priorities wouldn't it?

As for the Republic? Of course I am for one of the people (like the US) and that is why the Referendum (minus the Howard spin). There are established and democratic models to choose from.

Finally, there are good people on both sides - unfortunately the party system doesn't allow them to work together in the interest of the nation.
Posted by Lexi, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 10:18:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lexi

Yes, thanks. But really, fiddling with water courses is not a good solution is it?

As for 'working in the national interest', well, where is it?

Among this disparate mob of OLO opionists we all make up, just look at this thread Belly started, where is the common understanding of 'a national interest'?

There is no such thing.

In part, because we have no clear picture of what 'a nation' is, do we?

The 'national interest' of Howard is not mine, nor the Rudd one. Gillard has no idea what it is, and just makes jabs in the dark to gather votes, but hang on, we all love Katter, don't we?

He wants to part the Red Sea and send it to Alice Springs to populate the inland and turn it into a Club Med venue.

Now, is that 'in the national interest'?

Then again, Fred Nile maybe should be doing that, with his name, but does he have any idea what the 'national interest' is, or does he serve another nation altogether, the nation of Jesus?

Is that your nation? It ain't mine thanks!

No, fumbling around for 'national interest' ideas is hogwash.
Posted by The Blue Cross, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 10:43:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy