When in Victoria the then premier Jeff Kennett (Liberal) was amalgamating councils I was not aware that then John Howard and his mates were opposing him!
Actually, it did not bother me then there was an amalgamation and after the amalgamation I for one could not detect there was any reduction in service. Now, Buloke being in the Mallee being of considerable size, the reformed Council simply ensured that it provided ongoing services. Less councillors means less overhead cost. Also, the amalgamation means avoiding duplication of little used equipment, etc.
As for John Howard’s argument to amend the Commonwealth electoral Act, on my blog at http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH I have already published this is unconstitutional. Also, the state of Queensland would first have to pass legislation to allow a levy against Queenslanders to fund this as the cost cannot be taken from Consolidated Revenue. The Framers of the Constitution made clear what could or could not be funded from Consolidated Revenue.
I do not have the impression that Premier Peter Beattie, so to say, wants to be some ratbag against Queenslanders but seek to improve matters. Ample of time I have criticised Premier Peter Beattie but I view that in this case he appears to me to do the right thing. It just seems that in an election year, no matter what he does, he is damned if he improves something and damned if he doesn’t.
.
As for Bernie Masters, wake up, increasing the members in the Federal Parliament isn’t going to resolve anything, rather complicate matters as more thief’s and liars will be there and more to just "follow" whatever their political leaders tells them to do. What we need is a better type of politicians, one who put the constituents before the political party! Having 150 or so “followers” is worse then having, say, 30 free spirited representatives!
poerhaps a referendum to ban political parties in federal parliament might just be a better solution, but unlikely to be held!