Fair Call Simon.

Whilst you dont get the best 'bang for your buck' with regional development and infrastructures, at least it allows development within non capital environments and makes it viable for many people to make the change and provide some longevity to many a struggling region.

If we can do this and grow our interior cities and towns, such as Inverell in northern NSW where water supplies are almost indefinate and power supplies are underutilised, we can enter an era of prosperity that will facilitate growth in both infrastructure and populations where we need it most.

If all these things where in the country areas, especially broadband (allowing for a myriad of employment and self empoyment options) maybe the exodus of young from these towns will reduce, along with attracting others who find lifestyle and opportunites.

At least there is a commitment from you guys, it seems that the Liberals and Nationals hve got complacent with this issue.

Well said Simon,however if Howard gets his way he will control a large chunk of Eastern inland Australia through his so called water initiative for the Murray/Darling Basin.
Under the guise of protecting waterways feeding into the MDB Howard would have the capacity to control all activities being undertaken or planned for that area.He would have the capacity to over ride local and state governments.
He thinks he has gained the political initiative with his $10b over 10 years.This is a nonsense of a proposal.It was announced without any comprehensive prior studies.Surely the science and the studies should be done first,priorities established and funding sought against this background.
Howard has come up with an ammount conjured from thin air( it sounds a lot )and asks ( demands ) that all programs must fit within that ammount of money.
Howard proposes spending $55b on defence over this same period without identifying who our enemies are other than that will 'o the whisp international terrorism.
The Australian public have already indicated that they believe the environment,including water,is more important than Howards war on terror.
In my opinion $10b over 10 years is nowhere near enough to address the problems of the Basin.
The government has been prepared to consider throwing away $1b on the failed Sea Sprite helicopter.
The MDB proposal cuts no ice in WA,Tas., or NT. In my opinionion Aust. needs a National Water Authority to manage and research the issue of water throughout the country.
For reasons above there needs to be an independent authority to manage the MDB.
Howards inclination is to support the big irrigators,he needs to be exposed on this and stopped from doing so.
Bruce Haigh
Mudgee

the common theme of chatterati discussion in australia is the use of the passive voice. x needs to be done. or that old standby: " the gummint should do something ".

this is natural. in a democracy, the citizens would discuss, agree, initiate a referendum, and do something. in a political squattocracy like oz, the sheep can "baa" all they like, but they can do nothing.

in the end, discussion here is mere gossip.

nowadays the gossip is about the young massa, who will fix all the ills the old massa somehow never got around to.

What about education Simon! it is the cornerstone of all regional development, and I don't just mean education for rural trades and industry. Lets give those kids a fair go!

You say the solution should be a local one, so lets look at rural schools as different entities than city schools. Have you considered the issues raised by Phil Roberts last week? http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5755

Actually DEMOS one would hope that the contributor of an article here would read some of the comments. This means that what gets said here DOES matter. Whilst we dont have a direct vote in the issues ourselves, we can certainly lobby our local members - that's what they are there for. Most people see this as just being too hard. However, I've done so on a few occasions and generally been pleased with the results. Yes, its a lot of effort - most pollies are quite busy people (worse when your member is deputy PM), but if you feel strongly enough about something then its worth the effort.

Bruce,
"Under the guise of protecting waterways feeding into the MDB Howard would have the capacity to control all activities being undertaken or planned for that area"

Isn't that exactly what needs to happen? Until now the states have suited themselves in relation to water and interstate rivalries have done nothing for the MDB. Under national control priorities can be assessed without considerations of a parochial nature.

I was under the impression the $10b plan encompassed all states and territories. The MDB being the largest and facing the largest problems obviously will take most of that money.

As a small irrigator I trust Mr Howard will look after me too, not just the big ones.