I travel on Sydney trains three days each week through the city. It is interesting to note the majority of commuters are from nationalities where overcrowding and poverty is normal. They rarely leave their national peers who have settled in the City. They know little about Australian farms and assume they are poor subsistence.

Australian Agriculture is among the best in the world (when not in drought) and create great export dollars for this nation. The farmers are not paid equal to a fair share of their produce. The farmers are still paid prices they received ten years ago. If real price flowed to the farmers the country towns could survive within our economy.

"This is dealing with itself. As house prices go up in the cities, people will sacrifice income to work elsewhere in order to get the better lifestyle, cheaper housing etc. There is no need to government interference in this. You have to let people figure it out for themselves."

Umm but its not working itself out. We are still seeing a migration from the rural/regional areas to the cities, which in turn is increasing the pressure on existing infrastructure, housing prices and services.

Of course the government should have some hand in managing population movements. The free market is notoriously bad at managing social change. You say people will sacrifice income to work elsewhere, not if there aren't any jobs to work at they wont.

Decentralising government will have two main benefits. Firstly, dumping a government agency or department in the middle of a depressed region will help to stimulate the local economy, the new influx of people and jobs will be more than welcome. Secondly, it will encourage the development of new infrastructure and services to meet the needs of the new population.

Hey Freediver, "team" and bureaucrats" are not words that should be used in the same sentence, whether they are in the same office or at different ends of the country! :)

A few points:
* windfarms might be good for green power generation, but dont require much employment

* "lifestyle" is no longer considered sufficient to entice people out of the cities

Far north QLD is a great case in point. Larger centres like Cairns and Townsville are crying out for all sorts of employees. They have the Reef and rainforests on their doorsteps, good sized business centres with a number of services and industry ready to roll ahead, but they cant get people into the area. Housing isnt cheap (at least on par with suburban metro areas), but incomes still cant be competitive at this stage. Why, because businesses cant produce without the employees that they need, so its a catch-22. This is why targeted programs to help attract employees are likely to need to run short-term only, particularly in some locations.

This isnt just about dusty little outback towns, its about anywhere outside of the capital cities. Regional Australia means more than Broken Hill.

"Umm but its not working itself out.

Yes it is. Just because you don't like the outcome doesn't mean it isn't working. Since before recorded history, the march of progress ahs been reflected in the movement of people off the land and into villages, then towns, then cities. Now you want to try to stop this, yet you haven't offered any reasonable justification for it. Things change. Quit trying to make everyone live in the past.

"Of course the government should have some hand in managing population movements.

Why? Should people not be free to move wherever they want? Should a person be penalised for moving away from you?

"The free market is notoriously bad at managing social change.

True. The only thing which is worse at managing it is government. Especially when it is driven by people with funny ideas about what is in the country's best interest.

"* "lifestyle" is no longer considered sufficient to entice people out of the cities

by whom?

"Far north QLD is a great case in point.

You think a bunch of white people should want to live in the tropics? I've been there. Nice holiday, but I wouldn't want to live there. Remember that the cost of air conditioning is about to go up. Where I live now you can get by with no heating and no air con.

"Housing isnt cheap

That's because there has been a recent influx of people into some of these areas.

"Why, because businesses cant produce without the employees that they need, so its a catch-22.

No it is not a catch-22. If labour is cheaper, businesses in the area will grow and there will be a motivation for more businesses to come. I have worked in a high tech company that did just that - it moved to a more regional area to suit the lifestyle desires of the employeees. The same thing that makes employees want to move will also make employers want to move. The only difference is that employers will look harder at the long term prospects, not temporary affects.

freediver:

"Why? Should people not be free to move wherever they want? Should a person be penalised for moving away from you?"

Of course they are free to move wherever they like. However the government can make it more attractive to live in a location. This can be done by improving services and infrastructure. This is something that governments have been doing for the last good thousand years, so I don't know why its such a radical thought today.

The government cannot make one location more attractive without punishing people who move to some other location. You are not simply requesting that regional areas be made a nicer place to live. What you are asking is that money be taken from people in the large cities and given to people in regional areas. This needs justification, not assumptions.