The Forum > Article Comments > Scrap the states? Would we have to scrap the constitution too? > Comments
Scrap the states? Would we have to scrap the constitution too? : Comments
By Gabrielle Appleby, published 4/1/2013Bob Hawke has reprised his call from 1984 for the abolition of the states. Is it that easy?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Page 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 9
- 10
- 11
-
- All
Posted by Little Devil, Sunday, 6 January 2013 8:31:04 PM
| |
Those who want to abolish the states altogether must explain exactly where those current state powers are to go. If you want them all to go to Canberra then come out and say so. And we will condemn you as the dangerous centralist that you really are.
But if you want to shift all state powers to enlarged local government then you need to explain what the difference is between your enlarged local government and a new regional state formed out of one of the existing ones, as is already provided for under the constitution. It should also be noted that one of our territories, The ACT, has chosen to abolish local government. That function is performed by their Department of Local Government. Our other territory, The NT, has opted to maintain three tiers of government, primarily in response to the remoteness of their communities and distance between them. So to those who promote only two tiers of government one can only ask, "how dare you take it upon yourself to force a single solution on a diverse population in even more diverse circumstances"? Who the hell do you think you are? We must keep the current constitution because those who would change it have shown us that they cannot be trusted. We should remove the impediments to the formation of new regional states. And it should remain a matter for each of those new and remnant states to decide how they deliver local governance themselves. Posted by Lance Boyle, Monday, 7 January 2013 8:15:33 AM
| |
Lance, you & others have entered this discussion on the assumption that
nothing other than the government arrangements will change. What everyone will have to consider is that any changes will in fact be forced on us by major changes in the economy and the localisation of everything. Industry will be downsizing to suit the available energy availability and costs. Federal government will be reduced in its functions, state government will also have less functions, and may not exist. Regional councils, perhaps elected by the councilors of a group of local councils, say perhaps 20 local councils would take over many of the functions of state governments. That is one model and perhaps not the best. Perhaps another model would be to retain the state governments but reduce their functions dramatically. All in all I don't think it will matter much what we think, how we will be governed will be imposed upon us by circumstances as the economy changes to a zero growth steady state local economy. Both Federal & State governments will become largely irrelevant. Posted by Bazz, Monday, 7 January 2013 9:29:52 AM
| |
Dear Bazz,
<<Both Federal & State governments will become largely irrelevant.>> Amen, is all I can say, but meanwhile, talking about an energy crisis, why keep flying all those politicians in and out of Canberra? Posted by Yuyutsu, Monday, 7 January 2013 9:52:19 AM
| |
Bazz I agree we need to revamp all public services, dramatically downward.
That does not require a change to the structure, just the size of the workforce. A 50% reduction in administrative staff throughout every area, & a very large reduction in underemployed "front line staff" like university lecturers should immediately follow. Probably require another similar exercise after a year or so, to get the numbers right. If you are worried about unemployment, not that you could call what many bureaucrats do for their large salaries employment, we could bung them all in the army, on privates pay, privileges & authority. That would do many of them much good, & should scare the pants off any potential enemy. A western nation, with a hundred or two thousand cannon fodder, what a thought. Posted by Hasbeen, Monday, 7 January 2013 12:47:39 PM
| |
Yes Hasbeen, your comment on downsizing the public service is really
the point, as it will not be optional but forced by lower government income. Even the present Labour government is having to acknowledge that things have changed. The next government if they remove the pollie blinkers will find that the game has already changed. We have been playing by the new rules for the last six years but the governments are trying their best to ignore it until after the election. Next year, if they are honest (sic), they will cut so savagely that there will be an enormous uproar. You might find this interesting. I had never heard of this organisation previously, but I think they may well be the way of the future. http://www.resilience.org/stories/2012-12-24/the-outlook-for-steady-state-economics-in-2013 Posted by Bazz, Monday, 7 January 2013 1:21:05 PM
|
The constitution is over 110 years old and it is not a reflection on modern Australia.
Why don't we have a new constitution like this one
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/australian-identity/republic/independent-australian-constitution/
I know it can be clean up a bit, but it is a start.