Even though the role of western governments have tended to follow the trend from a building and regulating role, to a persuading and less direct involvement in infrastructure building, I wonder if this is the best way to progress into the future.

From the environmentally sustainable view point I see the situation like a feast that has been laid out to be consumed by people using their best means of obtaining the dishes of their choice. Initially the government has set up some tables and chairs and some means of getting the feast to the banquet hall. Now it steps back and makes sure no one cheats too much or robs the other diners, and hands out some leaflets to educate people on how not to poison themselves, hopefully.

Unfortunately this model takes little account of how much and how long the food is really available for, or who's going to clean up the mess afterwards. Sooner or later I think we will need to go back to regulation and public control of resources to protect them for the future. Either that or a model has to be found that gives people the right incentives to produce this outcome.

A few years ago, in conversations with progressive economist John Quiggin, I arrived at the figure of $5 billion necessary to eliminate waiting lists in public hospitals. The real figure could even be higher. The Coalition has also taken abouit $4 billion out of higher education, while schools the nation over are in crisis suffering from insufficient funds and a crisis of investment. Furthermore, the quality of aged care is appalling and yet, even with that said, aged care is already a massive feature on the federal budget. The ageing population, what is more, will put tremendous pressure on the PBS which is already being undermined by Howard. How much, therefore, is necessary to solve the problem? One thing is for certain - we're talking billions and billions. And so for social democrats the question really is still between small and big government. Only with 'bigger government' will we be able to solve these problems - unless we want to place them in the 'too hard' basket forever.

Tristan

Mr. Tanner,
Some of us would argue that government should return to its responsibilities of 50 years ago. Since the privatization of almost everything government has traditionally done, standards have fallen alarmingly. Infrastructure for example in North Queensland has been virtually non existant since the Hawke government completed the Burdekin Falls Dam in 1987. Public education funding cuts have meant schools are run down, Health cuts mean hospitals are run down, and you speak of families on $60,000 per annum, out of my friends and associates in Townsville, I know of only 1 family in this catergory, an underground gold miner and his family.

This is why the ALP have remained in opposition for so long, and will remain there, because thought processes are similar to the Liberal Party, how can you oppose something that you inherently believe in yourself. Some of us, in fact a great many of us are still living in humble surroundings, the only difference to your grandfathers time is that these days the ALP does not stick up for us, like it did him.

The Union movement was responsible for much of the improvement in living standards, now we are going backward, with it seems the ALP playing Waltzing Matilda as low income families sink through the floor. Get rid of the right wing attitudes and you traditional base may return.

Thank you Mr Tanner for your article.

I am now quite certain that I won't be voting Labor at the next federal election.

You have forgotton your party's philosophy.

Government by the people for the people.

Why pay taxes at all if our very foundation is not maintained? People, human beings need education, health services, utilities, shelter and food on the tables. Unless we have a government prepared to regulate for such basics then why have a government at all?

We may as well appoint a CEO - John Howard is doing that job very well already.

Lindsay I think you have argued yourself out of a job.

What planet does this bloke live on? It can't be this one.
Competition policy has cost dairy farmers 30% of their income, & I pay 35% more at the shop. Good example.
Reduced regulations? Where? I am no longer allowed to do half the things, on my own property, that I used to do. Those that I can still do I have to have a permit for, & I have to pay for the permit, & wait 9 months to get it.
I can't ride my horse to town, because there is no where to put a rego sticker on the horse, & they have not figured out how to charge fuel tax on the grass he eats. Yet!
If I want a little dam, for my horse to drink out of, I must have another permit, & the horse will probably have died of thirst, or old age, before I get that.
Is there any truth in the rumor, that they have let a contract to design a water meter that can measure the water running off my roof, into my tank? I've heard they want to have permit system for that, & charge me by the liter.
It is more than my life's worth to do anything to the bl@@dy great gum tree endangering my shed, but I am going to prune the hibiscus, & be dammed to them.
I suppose i'll be caught, & have to go to jail. I wonder if I have to have a permit for that.
Hasbeen

Hasbeen you live in the same land as me !

It seems to me the only thing ungoverned these days is government itself ..