It is projected that by the end of 2026 there will be 107,000 public servants enforcing government regulations. A 19% increase since 2023.

The cost to taxpayers of these regulators will be around $15 billion. An increase of $2.7 billion since 2023.

This increased cost to the Australian taxpayer is a result of hiring staff in the Climate Change, Environment and Water portfolio.

Productivity in Australia is collapsing, while the red/green tape appliers are more than ever burdening business and economic growth.

Half of the federal government workforce is engaged in regulatory activities. Red tape soared by 88% from 2005-2013. Its growth has been two-thirds greater than the overall growth in the national economy in the same period.

(Source, Institute of Public Affairs)

ttbn,

Whatever this bunch of diehard Tories are telling you, its FAKE NEWS!
Why don't they advocate for a massive cut in Aged Welfare, and save the taxpayer some of the $60 billion wasted on old warn out non-productive's annually.

Ttbn

You always resort to blaming the voter and attribute the hamartia or the fatal flaw in the system giving dreadful outcomes as you see it, to them; but your a voter yourself; why are you not equally to blame?

Isn’t the seat of the problem in the system that parades as Democracy but in fact is Autocratic. It’s a chimera or fake Democracy the way it is, but you still support its ruse by voting. Shame on you son!

Pay your $55 fine for failing to vote, and get the flock outa there, is good advice.

I didn't mention voters in this post. Voters are not part of this post at all.

But yes, I have little respect for voters - particularly now, when they have awarded the appalling Socialists another term, and will still continue moaning about how hard up they are. The silly buggers deserve everything they get. So do you, for not voting at all; although I have to admit that voting is looking to be a waste of time these days: again because there are too many silly buggers.

Now, what do you think about the actual subject?

Dear Ttbn,

«Now, what do you think about the actual subject?»

I don't support productivity - let those who want to work, work, and those who don't, live their life peacefully.

There will always be the lazy ones, and if you try to make them work against their nature, then they will necessarily do more damage than good.

Public "servants" too have families to feed and mortgage to service.
It will be good if those 107,000 people are instructed to come and lie down on the beach (in summer, or play backgammon in winter) rather than to the office, then at least they will do no harm - getting them out of the way is worth more than $15 billion!

I was always certain that preferential voting was a good idea
as no one who was not wanted by a majority could get elected in a three
way contest.
It seems to get corrupted if many parties are involved.

I see signs that there will be a flock of legislation that will cause
farmers and others much stress from climate pushers.

Dear Bezza,

There is nothing wrong with preferential voting - if anything, it somewhat mitigates Australia's undemocratic electoral system: it is not corrupt, only insufficient to correct and make a significant dent in the overall corrupt system.

ttbn,

Your line of argument is nonsense, the Tory thoughtless tank, the Institute of Public Affairs, starts from a position of bias against public servants and then extrapolates its argument based on contrived "facts". Your first sentence;

"It is projected that by the end of 2026 there will be 107,000 public servants enforcing government regulations. A 19% increase since 2023."

Projected by whom? The very people who want to denigrate public servants to begin with, that's who!

Then there is this little gem;

"Red tape soared by 88% from 2005-2013. Its growth has been two-thirds greater than the overall growth in the national economy in the same period."

How do you quantify "red tape"? 88% is a sham figure, simply made up, to prosecute a nonsense argument. How is it measured, AND what is so called "red tape" as opposed to "blue tape" or "sticky tape" BTW 2005-2013 is hardly relevant to 2025!

The number of people receiving aged welfare is growing by 6% annually, that is not sustainable. Action needs to be taken now, to reduce the impost of old non-productive's on society. It would be good for the nation if once reaching the age of 80, and having lived off aged welfare for 15 years, that a department of the public service review "life expectancy" for this cohort, and recommend appropriate action be taken.

Bezza

I have always seen preferential voting as wrong. First past the post works in other countries, and it doesn't waste voters’ time with ridiculous little parties that are usually one-off brain-farts rattling around in the heads of weirdos.

Yuyutsu

You shouldn't have any trouble getting a doctor's note to relieve you from the responsibility of voting.

Dear Ttbn,

«First past the post works in other countries, and it doesn't waste voters’ time with ridiculous little parties»

I.E. it doesn't waste voters' time in dreaming of being represented by those they choose, trust and believe in, who could vote in parliament for what is really important and critical for them. This way they never get deluded in the first place of having a democracy: "Of the people, by the people, for the people" is just a slogan, it was never meant for ordinary people.

First by the post:

Islamic party gets 34%
Christian party gets 33%
Secular party gets 30%
LGBT party gets 3%

Islamic party wins and the law no longer allows you to shave or listen to music... even though 66% of the population wants to allow it - tough luck, your chin is badly itching!

Fortunately, doctor's note relieves you from having to go to the mosque.
Instead, 39 devout men visit you at home 5 times a day to pray together with you in your lounge.

Yuyutsu

None of the parties you list exist: they are not registered in Australia, and it is unlikely that they ever would be. Let's be realistic.

It is amazing, though, just how many crackpot shows are registered - most of them wouldn't even get the Trumpets’ of (can't remember) 1.9% of the primary vote.

Further, most people do not vote by religion or sexuality. Without preferences, one of the two major parties would still be in government, just like they are in countries without preferential voting. But, as with those other countries, the parties would have to campaign on the differences, not just on what they think the people want to hear so they keep the overpaid jobs they can't get in the real word.

Most of the minor parties are wackjobs. Only a couple of them get into the Senate - and they wouldn't be there either if voters were allowed to simply put a number against the candidate they actually want.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the topic, but that seems to be the norm on OLO.

Hi Yuyutsu

Muslim Votes Matter, describes itself as an independent, grassroots political organisation dedicated to "promoting the political engagement and voice of Australian Muslims. The group is expected to support candidates who align with its values.

Family First Party; Mission, To build a political movement that will fight for and sustain the social and economic well-being of the nation by promoting family, life, faith, freedom, enterprise and subsidiarity .

Both the above have very strong ties to religions.

ttbn say;

"ridiculous little parties that are usually one-off brain-farts rattling around in the heads of weirdos" YES, and did you not support half a percent Australian Conservative Party run by number one weirdo Corny Banana. More reticently you were encouraging others to vote One Nation, Trumpet of Patriots and The Libertarian Party. Now you tell us they are all weirdoes, what does that make YOU!

Dear Ttbn,

Yes, we got side-tracked off the topic in discussing First-Past-The-Post.
I definitely oppose FPTP and there is much I could say about it, but that would be outside the confines of this topic - public servants employed to regulate our lives, so going back:

Well my soft heart would not allow me to make 107,000 families hungry, whose bread-winners never obtained any useful skills and therefore had to resort to harassing others with regulations. If these people are cut off dry, then they, their friends and their extended families would certainly fight back tooth and nail to keep their livelihood, and so they will regain power and we will continue to suffer their regulations.

Instead, I would close down their offices and send them to the beach, letting them eat, drink and be merry at tax-payer's expense - getting them off our backs is certainly worth more than their $15 billion salaries (and well, we can also save some by turning off their air-conditioners and converting their office-buildings into residential property).

Seemingly ideological big-talk politics is often no more than just that - a personal financial-survival strategy.

Sometimes we just need to BUY our freedom...

Yuyutsu

I think you are in parallel existence. I do understand some of what you say. Public servants are ordinary people, but they are putting other people out of work and impoverishing Australia.

If these people were not used to retard the private sector, there would be jobs for them in with the very people they are hindering now. Apart from essential services, there is no place for government in our lives. The way that the Albanese government - our most Left wing ever - is overreaching its responsibilities, interferening in things it knows nothing about - our country will, sooner than later, be just like other countries run by dictatorships.

Already, two or more generations expect free stuff. They expect to be bribed to vote for people who are taking them to the bottom.

Ruining our economy by deindustrialisation, red and green tape and regulations, ridiculous windmills and shiny gee-gaws, when we have the cheapest means of electricity in the ground, is a damn funny way of providing for future generations the commos claim to be looking out for.

On top of rules and regulations, with more taxation, the Albanese socialist regime intends to steal from ‘only a minority of Australians’ to make the rest of us not bother about the theft; but that “minority” is made up by people who do most of the heavy lifting in Australia, pay the most tax, grow our food, manufacture the few things left that aren't imported, provide jobs.

The regime intends to:

. Tax unrealised capital gains in large superannuation funds from July 1st, impacting those who haven’t actually received income.

. Tax Hardworking Australians like farmers, retirees, and small investors who will be forced to sell assets to pay tax on paper gains.

. There will be no inflation-indexed, so more people will be caught in the tax net over time.

. It is argued that the Labor policy will undermine trust in the superannuation system and spare political elites with protected pensions.

. Capital could be pushed offshore, innovation crushed, and end up mirroring failed overseas experiments like Norway’s wealth tax.

Chalmers has unleashed fear, confusion, forced liquidation, and betrayal. And he will quietly rope in more and more Australians each year. There will be catastrophe.

Dear Ttbn,

This is a bit like driving on the road:
You could drive rightly, or you could drive wisely.
You may have the right of way at an intersection and may insist on it, but if the other driver ignores it, or is inattentive, then while you may win your day in court, life wouldn't be as fun with all those broken bones.

If any government proposes to fire public "servants", then those "servants" would riot, and regardless of whatever other political convictions their extended families may otherwise have, they would all join forces to save their aunt/nephew/cousin/etc. from the sack, and in a democracy they will have the numbers to change government and back come all the regulations, in fact they would regulate even more fervently in order to prove that they are needed.

But so long as the salaries keep coming in, they and their families wouldn't mind - they could even vote for you because they like their leisure!

So the realistic choice is between:
1) Paying the "public-servant" salaries and keeping all the regulations and their enforcement intact; or
2) Paying the same salaries but with nobody enforcing regulations as the enforcers would be playing volleyball on the beach.

I certainly prefer the second option!

If you insist on maximising your returns and getting back everything you are fairly being owed, then you will end up with nothing: give some away and you will prosper with the rest - be wise on the road rather than being right and have your bones broken.

For some, particularly those of the hard right, they see REGULATION, all regulation, as a dirty word, its to be avoid at all cost. Referring to red tape, whatever that actually is, as some barrier that must be broken down. The fact is without necessary regulation things like the environment would be put at risk by "cowboys" seeking profit as the only desirable motive, and everything and everyone else be damned.

The Bureau of Meteorology is an example of Australia's you-beaut public servants. For a week now, rain has been predicted in Adelaide for today. 60% chance of rain, the bozos said.

Yesterday they said 95% chance of rain.

Today: 'rain tomorrow morning'. The only 'shower' is the BOM itself and its hopeless wild guesses.

No wonder farmers are paying private meteorologists for information and forecasts.

Australia should be the richest country in the world. In 1900, Melbourne was the richest city in the world. Look at it today!

Argentina was also a very rich country. Along came the Socialists, and down the gurgler it went. At least Argentina now looks like improving with the Socialists gone.

But Australia, after only three years of Albanese socialism (with the help of Turnbull and Morrison), is on a downward trend. Argentina Mark 11, here we come.

Australia has been deindustrialised by mad Socialists and their red/green tape and regulations.

We have the grossest erosion of wealth in the developed world.

Highest cost of living.
Highest cost of housing.

The biggest cause of our problems? Mass immigration.

We send natural resources we should be using ourselves overseas. Net Zero means we are also exporting our emissions (small though they are) overseas, so a bunch of loons can pretend they are ‘saving the planet’.

Our manufacturing is 5.39% of GDP - on a par with Botswana! Our overall performance is on a par with Equatorial Guinea according to one economist.

All of this is caused, not by Communist China and other enemies. It is caused by the politicians that are voted in by Australian citizens.

ttbn,

After reading that the IPA was the source of the concerns you raised, I figured I’d better check their claims. And I’m pleased to report the data they published was misleading and stripped of necessary context.

//…by the end of 2026 there will be 107,000 public servants enforcing government regulations.//

Sounds scary - until you realise this includes everyone from environmental scientists to safety inspectors. Most aren’t drowning businesses in red tape, they’re cleaning up after years of cuts.

//An increase [in costs] of $2.7 billion since 2023.//

That’s the price of doing what previous governments didn’t. It’s not just “regulation enforcement,” it’s water security, energy security, and environmental recovery. All it does is put us where we need to be. The real cost will be the impact of the years of neglect.

//Productivity in Australia is collapsing…//

Blaming regulation for productivity decline is convenient, but lazy. The actual culprits are stagnant wages, lack of R&D, short-term business models, and policy churn - not emissions standards or heritage listings.

//Half of the federal government workforce is engaged in regulatory activities.//

That includes customs officers, food safety labs, fraud investigators, building inspectors, and ASIC. If you think they’re the problem, try living without them.

//Red tape … growth has been two-thirds greater than the overall growth in the national economy in the same period.//

That stat comes from counting restrictive words in legislation only. It doesn’t measure their value or necessity. More tech, more trade, more risk = more oversight. That’s not a chokehold, that’s complexity management.

Just ignore the IPA and go straight to the source. Activist groups with an agenda to push are never going to give you the full story. Your claims since your OP suffer from the same problems, but I'll have to get to those later.

Ttbn.

It’s infantile to go on blaming the Australian voter for your perceived political failures.

You condemned my early post above, highlighting your obsession with blaming the voter, as off topic.

And here you go again Viz;
“All of this is caused, not by Communist China and other enemies. It is caused by the politicians that are voted in by Australian citizens.”…

You should address the issue of compulsory voting that forces 93% Australians into a voting booth when in fact they ( like myself), prefer to stay free and disengaged from the real estate moguls parading as your trustworthy representatives.

You must stop this or risk falling into the trap of negative blame gaming.
When there is , if ever, a circumstance where Australians are given a choice to exercise their right to be free of forced coercion to vote against their wishes, then at that point, the voter can be justifiably blamed for poor political outcomes.