There needs some referendum questions asked during the upcoming elections.
Should the federal govt take over the health care system.
Should the federal govt take control of the river murray system.
Should AU move toward a republic.
Should local councils be disbanded in favor of a central authority

I say yes to all of them.
But for me the real question is who will lead a trounced Liberal party after it.
Abbott is making a run but maybe Hockey?
ONLY CERTAINTY? no independents in the upper house Labor increases its majority.
And conservatives looking for a new leader.

I also say yes to all of the questions.

And belly, since you just can't help yourself, history shows that labor gets in, for a term or two, runs rieo and ruins the ecconomy, then the coalition gets back in and balances the books.

It's simply just a matter of time.

As for who will lead the coalition into the next election, I recon costelo may well make a come back. He may even get a lesson or two from beasly hey!

Ar, bring it on, I love it when you talk dirty!

Costelo doesn't want to lead into 2010, & suffer a defeat. Who ever leads into that election will not still lead for the next, when Labor will have shot themselves in the feet, often enough for the average voter to notice.

That's the one Costelo wants to lead into, hence all the BS.

Otherwise rehctub, you're right, of course.

Chalk me up to another "yes to all".

As for rehctub's comments, it will be interesting to see how many people still buy that piece of conservative dogma after Swan's all-star handling of the Right-induced GFC. But then, the long Hawke/Keating reign and its economic reforms have been successfully glossed over, so why not?

I love it when we have a consensus topic - yes from me to all of the above as well :)

Mind you, at least two of the proposed questions would be doomed at a referendum.

"yes to all".

all these yes votes come so unthinkingly...so being as i am i will try to make a case for maybe..[or maybe not]..in reality i know its going to be the same boys clubs running the sshow either way[and supreem power corrupts absolutly

<<Should the federal govt take over the health care system.>>in light of the abuses of subsidising medicine...and seeing as 2/3 rd of the current costs go to admin...im guessing govt affects should be minimised..

[privatise the bloominmg lot..[govt shouldnt be running hospitals]..legislate that docters and nurses/cleaners expenditure..should outnumber admin expenditure

<<Should the federal govt take control of the river murray system.>>it should not be buying back water licences...but should legislate the more you want the more you pay

<<Should AU move toward a republic.>>it affectivly allready is..[what we really need is that constituted oversight body...we somehow never got...before we change what we are..[please explain what we are...

we are a british colony...not a nation...maybe gg should be appointed by the people..popular vote...and he/she solely conducts audits of all govt agencies/minesters

<<Should local councils be disbanded in favor of a central authority>>too much admin..[lets appoint thousands of lord majors/administrating auditors..

[who run suburbs/streets..[not towns/cities]...order/tender out maintainance of all the inground infastructure/ser-vices..including police/courts/prisons/hospitals/school/old peoples homes

who spend their time being overlord/master delivering all govt services..accountably..to his fiefdom..[minimum admin..[maximum oversight by gg dept]...many small fish...[no big ones]..plenty of auditors policing the cash flow

Rechtub you are right on one thing Labor can not rule forever, but three terms are assured.
And your blindness to the GFC is funny, true you make me grin.
Mostly the conservatives while not yet finding a path to return to office will be better for an understanding they are no longer born to rule 12 years from now?
Bill Shorten for PM .

A big NO to all of them - "Government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem." RR.

Especially the Republic question. Young people love Australia's British heritage and they've never been more proud to fly the Australian flag. You can see this at all major gatherings of young people, they cover themselves with the flag.

If Australia becomes a republic, the country will look like Singapore, Malaysia or Indonesia within 2-3 generations. This is unpalatable to Australia's Anglo-Saxon majority. Young people don't want Australia to be an Asian country with Europeans living in it, but they want it to be a European country with Asians living in it.

TRUTHNOW78
"If Australia becomes a republic, the country will look like Singapore, Malaysia or Indonesia within 2-3 generations. This is unpalatable to Australia's Anglo-Saxon majority"
We speak for a political system you speak for a race! Do you represent the Australia's Anglo-Saxon?
Do not you know that about 75% of australians are against the monarchy?
TRUTHNOW78 is it truth that:
1)Australia's Anglo-Saxon are against monarchy in high degree? or
2) All Australia's Anglo-Saxon support monarchy but they are only 25% of Australian population?
3. If the non Anglo-Saxon are against the monarchy, then monarchy divides australian society, damages australias interests and Australia MUST BECOME REPUBLIC THE SOONEST POSIBLE!

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Evidently we have a few fans of big bureaucracies here. No doubt you all thought Bush's amalgamation of a whole pile of departments into a single Department of Homeland Security was a good idea too.

In my experience dealing with a local is always better than dealing with a cog in a wheel managed by some faceless bureaucrat 1000's of km's away. If I have a problem with my rubbish removal, or local roads, I would like having the people who ultimately responsible local, as opposed to being in some inaccessible office half way across the country. My state member being responsible for police and hospitals instead of some yobbo in Canberra sounds good to.

Another advantage is you get to see different ways of doing things tried out in each jurisdiction. You get to compare the outcomes. Such diversity is good, usually.

The Murray is different. It crosses state boundaries. It looks like each state plundered it for what they could get - bugger the others. Its a fine illustration of the tragedy of the commons. If it was Federally managed presumably our political system would ensure everybody gets equal access.

Be careful what you wish for though. Adelaide, capital of the driest state in the driest continent on the planet, just published their water plan for this century. In it they anticipate their population doubling. If they get equal votes these extra voters will insist their share of the Murray water gets flushed down Adelaide toilets, rather than being used for growing food where it falls. Personally, I think it would make more sense if they were forced to only use water from local rainfall. Keeping the Murray state managed may well ensure that outcome.

The "only" thing that's been mentioned that's bound to get through is- - - - - - - - Peter Costello to lead the Liberal Party to victory, after the next election which will be EASILY won by Labour. Peter's comeback will be the biggest of all time, as long as he can control the "smirk". My dear departed wife hated that "smirk". But he's been the smartest person in Federal Parliament since Paul Keating. Mr Keating set the agenda for serious economic change, and Mr Costello successfully carried on with a very similar agenda. Peter Costello will one day make a GREAT Prime Minister.

One thing we DON'T need is to get rid of local government. It would be a nightmare trying to deal with "local" issues via a non localised government. If you think bureaucracy is a nightmare now, wait till they do away with local government. You'll then know what a "real" nightmare is like.

I would vote against all of them, particularly the removal of local councils.

The greater centralisation of power is the path to despotism.

Conversely the devolution of authority, combined with local knowledge and accountability (as in local councils) is the better social approach to governmental administration and it always will be.

To AnSymeonakis “We speak for a political system you speak for a race! Do you represent the Australia's Anglo-Saxon?”

I find comments like that leave me rolling on the floor in fits laughter, where the writer obviously fails to understand the origin of the words he uses in protest to some fatuous notion of “racial exclusivity”

I of course am taking him to task over his criticism of someone who he claims represents “Anglo-Saxons”

And anyone with any education knows the very term refers to two (one-time) separate ethnic sub-groups or “Races”:

Being “Angles” on the one hand

and “Saxons” on the other.

AS sorry but it just must be said.
Do you understand what you write?
Or are you fond of telling lies?
Sorry some thing is very wrong
Your posts go from well written well thought out.
To ones like your last here in this thread.
Do you truly think 75% of this country's population is not Anglo Saxon?
Yes 25% of us are not born in Australia.
Sorry but I tried truly to forgive your statements about my country and its people.
I am finding it hard, truly hard, to understand why you written words have an accent?
Why do they, mimic how some talk who do do understand English?
Surely you do not have to write that way in one post and then word perfect in others?
In reply to others, Aussie do indeed love the bush, but spare me the rubbish about flags and mother England.
We would not need to change the flag to become a republic, we will however do both.
Rubbish that this flag, not the one that flew on foundation, is the only one we will ever have, England?
Well we can never forget out history but while I am convict stock I am republican and proud Aussie.

I tend to think the whole monarchy thing will be a thing of the past when the queen retires or passes. I see little and have little respect for charles, so it’s a big yes for me, always has been.

As for local governments, I have been of the opinion for some time that we should have one government for the entire country, do away with state and local and replace them with offices with fed gov reps.

One of the biggest issues with local governments is the fact that decisions are often made on emotion, or ones personal beliefs, rather than what is best for the region.

Tall poppies are also common within local governments. Ones who hate to see someone get ahead in life.

“Peter Costello will one day make a GREAT Prime Minister.”

Aaaaaaaah hahaahahahhaaaaaha haaaaaaaa

Master, you are hiiiiilarious!

I can understand Peter Costello's frustration when no-one believes he is retiring from politics.

Other issues for the referendum might include food imports, euthanasia, same sex marriages.

Australia has too many layers of bureaucracy, two tiers of government would surely be enough in a country with almost 22 million people.

The problem with health is too much bureacracy and administration. Better in my view to give overall policy management and oversight to the Commonwealth government and reduce administrative costs in favour of delivery of medical services (more staff and more beds).

BUT and this is important, devolve budgetary responsibility and purchasing power to the hospitals themselves. This cuts red tape and allows better flowing faster administrative processes which are not bogged down in the current system of large Area Health Services.

Amalgamate the councils,make them accountable and get rid of the State Govts.We cannot afford them and even less so as Kevin puts us into more debt.

Interest rates will rise and Govt taxes will create more poverty.There comes a time when individuals must take responsibilty and stop hiding behind the veil of victim status.

And please tell us exactly how you would make amalgamated councils "accountable", in the "real" world. In other words, not theoretically on paper, but real world, WORKABLE accountability.

And why would that same "accountability" not work with present councils that are NOT amalgamated?

Out here in Broken Hill we are under "administration". The old council was pretty hopeless. But the fact that we're under administration has nothing to do being amalgamated or not amalgamated. Amalgamated councils can be just as hopeless as non amalgamated councils.

I do not trust at all the local counsils. I heard bad stories about the the buildings, extensions etc even may be I have this kind of experiences!
Because the elections for local authorities are not compulsary only a small number of people vote for the City councelors and most of them do not have many experiences, knowledges or abilities. Council beaurocracy knows the weakness of the councils and I am afraid they are the real bosses in the city councils. I heard, I do not know, some stories for corruption etc, may be the land developers and construction companies have big influence on the city councils or on the beaurocracy of the councils!
I prefer the federal and state governments!

AAP report, December, 2010 : Nine months after the federal election, the government has moved to
---rationalize the health services
---arranged for laptops to be delivered to the 99% of schools, who still have not received them, and
---put in place proper water management of the Murray system.

In other moves, president Malcolm Turnbull has called an emergency meeting of heads of government to address :
1) Australia’s 16 Trillion dollar debt ( 10 trillion of which is owed in compensation payments to the developing world, arising from our signing of the Copenhagen climate change agreement)
2) Current interest rates of 24%
3) Unemployment rate of 50%, and .
4) The new Fitzgerald Commission is understood to be seeking Wayne Swan’s extradition from Nicaragua regarding funding irregularities . Authorities are also searching for Anna Blight & Kevin Rudd who have not been seen since the night of the federal election.

In related news: a coalition of social justice rights groups. –which have till now have enjoyed 100% employment – are charging the new administration with being racist, mean, horrible ,ugly and a real fun-spoiler, due to funding cuts, and threatened to take it to one or other of the international courts over violating section 131.5v of the UN Social Justice Convention , signed in the latter days of the previous Rudd administration – the ABC has suspended all normal programming to provide round the clock coverage of this development.

And, in local news, the Ugllaga Times reports that long term union stalwart Belly has applied to join the Liberal party

Thanks Horus but not even close.
2 silly ideas here Costello? come now the bloke is unlovable and gone, forever.
He could not win a raffle if he bought every ticket.
And for two more terms nor could his party.
Councils, few are any good, look to northern NSW and the idiots behind the glass house in port Maquarrie, or in Sydney the lunatics behind that lefty rubbish that did not want to fly our flag at Bondi.
AS you may not like me, but please try to address questions I and others have raised.
Bet your last dollar the election[it may yet be this year] is to be a lesson learned for the Turnbull team, if you can call it that.

Malcolm won't be leading the Liberal party into the next election. He's already a dismal failure.

The current Labour Government is currently enjoying a MAGNIFICENT honeymoon, which will continue for at least another 1 to 2 years. This is thanks to the MAGNIFICENT surplus left to them courtesy of the good work begun by Mr Keating, followed by the even better work of Australia's most successful treasurer, Mr Costello. Australia has a LOT to be grateful for, because of the great work of Paul Keating and Peter Costello.

Peter Costello will be out of parliament. The Liberals will be decimated at the next election. Mr Costello will return within several years to lead the Liberal Party to an easy victory. Why? Two reasons - - - - - firstly there's absolutely nobody in the Liberal party who comes even near his ability to make Labour look like amateurs; secondly when Labour has to finally stand on it's own two feet (instead of being propped up by the fantastic Liberal surplus) they will do what almost ALL Labour Federal govts. have done, SPEND, SPEND, SPEND with borrowed money and steer the country towards financial oblivion. Thus unemployment and inflation will QUICKLY rise to untenable levels. The country will get VERY restless. Peter Costello will be recalled, elected, voted into leadership and then lead the Liberal Party to victory in order to clean up (ONCE AGAIN) Labour's financial MESS!

Now that's clever Horus, a little to soon as I to think there is at least one more term left for labor. I don't think they have finnished screwing up our nation just yet.

But boy, you surely are on the money in my books, except for anna lie, I think there may be a 'mutiny' before she gets another shot.

Do you know what the libs’ ONLY chance of gaining power at the next election is?

Susbloodystainability!! Stand up and be seen to be REALLY different to the labs by promoting a sensible future plan that is based on genuine sustainability principles, including net zero population and an end to the utter absurdity of continuous expansionism.

If this was done properly, the community would rally behind it, for as long as they believed it was genuine.

Now, Turnbull is an ex environment minister. So you’d reckon he’d have some sort of understanding of sustainability principles (as opposed to economists and businessmen who just obviously don’t have a clue!)

And surely he could see this is the direction that Australia HAS to move in, sooner or later, in fact really soon.

And he can no doubt see that the libs just don’t have a chance in hell of winning the next election by just continuing to be a shadow of the labs.

They’ve got less chance of power than Costello has of becoming a half-decent human being…. um, I mean, of becoming PM….um, no I was right the first time….er no I was right both times!!

Cmawwn Turnbull, enough bull! Turn your party’s fortunes around. Embrace the new paradigm!

Please people
we all know you can only ask one question in any one referendum if you want the matter passed
my vote would be for an elected 'Head of State'

Malcolm Turnbull is a spent force. He doesn't even have the capacity to "really" convince his party that they actually lost the last election, let alone to convince them to embark on an enlightened environmental agenda. He's NOT an environmentalist, although compared to Tony Abbott he looks like the Patron Saint of the environment. Malcolm Turnbull is a MULTI MEGA MILLIONAIRE MERCHANT BANKER.

Luddy, you couldn't possibly be serious in expecting Mr Turnbull to implement a meaningful environmental policy AND actually get the support of his party! Malcolm is so weak he couldn't even convince Tony Abbott that the world is round!

The GREAT flaw in BOTH parties is that there's not enough people within them who actually understand the environment, and peoples' relationship to the environment. Luddy you couldn't be more wrong about Malcolm Turnbull, just as you couldn't be more wrong regarding your dark age mentality regarding the relationship between people and the environment. A mentality that belongs to a bygone era. But that's ok, you have a perfect right to express your ideas in a free society.

“Luddy, you couldn't possibly be serious in expecting Mr Turnbull to implement a meaningful environmental policy AND actually get the support of his party! Malcolm is so weak he couldn't even convince Tony Abbott that the world is round!”

You know Master, over the last decade I have travelled all over north and central Queensland with my job and spoken to hundreds of landholders... people who sit at the foundation of the National Party…people who hate greenies with a passion.

I wish I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard a landholder say something like; ‘I’m not a greenie but’….and then gone on to outline some pretty sound principles about balancing productivity with environmental health…. and to express their dislike of those who impose continuous rapid population growth on us amongst other things.

The fact is that people on the land are by and large pretty sustainability-minded.

The Nationals recognised this a few years back. Some of the things being bandied around by the Borbidge government (1995-8) and in its aftermath were pretty reasonable. I thought at the time that just maybe the most redneck party could become the greenest party….and do it based on the wishes of its constituency.

Well the same goes for Turnbull and his mob. Currently they’re about as antisustainabilityist as they could be. But if they’d just look at the true wishes and concerns of the Queensland public, I reckon they could find a way of advocating the right thing politically, and of putting themselves in a position to carry it out, ie: getting elected.

Now master, what’s this blab about dark age mentality? It seems that you don’t know what sustainability is…yes I’ve said this before….it’s not just about the environment, most importantly it is about US – our future wellbeing!

Don’t be so negative. Surely you can see that we simply MUST find a way to get our politicians to embrace sustainability. Given this absolute necessity, and given the desperation for those in opposition to win power, the two should be married……and there should be no reason why they can’t go together!

Belly
"no independents in the upper house Labor increases its majority"
Hooooh! your jokes are first class!
My friend,
voters from poor labours and unionists will go to Greens,
voters from migrants and women will go to Democrats
voters from small businesses will go to Liberals.
Forget the upper house and try to created the right relations with democrats and Greens.
You will have big problems from the small parties in the next elections!
re-read my post I do not say what you think. PROBABLY YOU DO NOT KNOW GREEKENGLISH!

ana ana ana ana ananother lie. Boy, back flip beaty sure tought her well, hey!

If only some of these fools would rub off on Krud and crew. They must be embarrested to be associated with a party like this lot in QLD.

AnSymeonakis “I do not trust at all the local counsils. I heard bad stories about the the buildings, extensions etc even may be I have this kind of experiences! …….. I prefer the federal and state governments!”

That is only because state and federal government have more resources available with which to bury their “bad stories”

Although, I think he might have made a good PM, I would ultimately to agree with Belly re Costello… his petulance has put him out of contention.

Ludwig.. I hear you but “sustainability” is based on a rational argument. Politics like everything else is driven not by what are the rational issues but by what are the emotional issues. Whilst “sustainability” might seem the right motivator, the final vote will be based on personality and more perception than fact. Hence all the Labor “spin doctors” busy spending our taxes on “hype”.

Col

Sustainability is not necessarily just about rational argument. It could be quite emotional. It depends on how it is ‘sold’.

Of course if Turnbull was to take up the challenge, then he’d set his spin-doctors on to the task of making it sound as emotional and sexy as possible.

We agree that the logical argument is there and that it’s not hard to get across at all. So the challenge would be sell the idea that a pro-growth party could be trusted with its embrace of a limits-to-growth philosophy and that a merchant banker could be a champion of grass-roots environmental principles!

This sounds like a formidable task. But as I say, I reckon this challenge is more easily met than the challenge of beating Rudd at his own game, with practically identical policies.

Ludwig, as so often happens, I wholly agree with you.

Ultimately, trying to beat an incumbent Prime Minister with "Me-To" policies only works when there is a ground swell and underlying desire for change... per the last election.

Although I place my personal support to the right of the political spectrum, I doubt Turnbull will lead the liberals/nationals to victory and I cannot see anyone else leaping up to fill the shoes of John Howard... more is the pity.

Because, at this time, we need politicians who understand the national need and who recognise, "centralisation of government", per health, water and emissions taxes, is not the direction we should be going.

It is, infact, in the opposite direction to effective government (aka smaller government).

“Ultimately, trying to beat an incumbent Prime Minister with "Me-To" policies only works when there is a ground swell and underlying desire for change... per the last election.”

Absolutely Col!

For Turnbull, or his replacement, to take this approach to the next election is just political suicide!

If by some strange chance they did manage to win, they’d win on the basis of being the slightly better choice of two evils! And the public would view it as such.

The only way they could win with that approach is if Rudd did something very highly unpalatable. They’d win by default. They’d win because they were the only alternative to a government that had greatly offended the constituency. Thus, they wouldn’t have support!

Whereas if they espoused a sustainability platform and won on that basis, they’d have genuine support.