The Australian Constitution unlike the USA, does not include a Bill of Rights.While many say that a Bill of rights will be a lawyers paradise for more litigation,this can be tempered with with a Bill of Responsibilities that clearly delineates Govt ,corporate and individual reponsibilities.We could limit Govt in running up huge deficits,and lawyers/individuals with their vexatious litigation claims.We also need the stop the powerful Corporate influence over our Govts.

So many people who come to Australia are over whelmed by the Govt intrusion into all our lives,particularily at a state level.It is far worse here than Europe and the USA.

I say we need a Libertarian movement like "Freedom Watch" begun by Judge Andew Napolatano in the USA. http://freedomwatchonfox.com/

The "nanny state" must cease to exist and we as individuals take control,since Govt cannot possibly replace the sum total of responsible individuals nurtured by survival and the urge for a better life. We need smaller Govt,lower taxes and more autonomy as individuals.

Can you give us some examples of govt intrusion, I am not sure at what level you are talking about.

Desmond ,where have you been for the last 20 yrs.It pervades our entire lives,from traffic control,cameras,variable speeds to catch us out for more fines,OH&S which no business can comply with,employment regulation,building regulations,water regulation,and now carbon taxes,possible taxes on cow flatulance.Drivers fined for smoking in their cars if there is a child on board.This is ludacris.The list goes on.

Look at the insanity of compulsory seatbelts.Motor cyclists don't wear them because it makes it even more dangerous than being in a car.Well using this logic,motor cycles should then be banned.Let the individual take reponsibility and then insurance companies can pay out less on accidents if you weren't wearing one.Problem solved.

I always wonder what people mean by libertarian because from what can be gauged from some reports is the right to the freedom to exploit others. Certainly at the corporate and business level anyway.

Surely commonsense has to prevail. A balance between private and public concerns without an overly-bureacratic government is the ideal isnt' it?

I don't see traffic cameras or RBT for example as great burdens on the public by the nanny state. The road death toll has been reduced since those measures were implemented.

What would be worse, a nanny state or a group of self-appointed liberation groups all with their own cause to push onto the rest of us.

The trick is to ensure the nanny state does not become too big brother, too bogged down in red-tape and regulation where it is not needed. Some regulation is obviously needed - we have the GFC to prove that.

There are many other ways to balance nanny state - afterall we elect the nannies, than just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Arjay that is incredible that you can think that way.
We must have laws so people can be protected against themselves.
As far as speed cameras go, you know how to avoid fines.
If we didn't have building regs; the place would be a shambles.
Smoking in cars with kids on board, you have got be joking.
I don't think you will get to many to agree with you on this one.

Pelican

Great commonsense post from you, as always. :)

Arjay

I find a lot of your thinking contradictory. On the one hand, you rail against the corporate excesses that have lead to the global financial crisis. And yet on the other, you argue against all forms of government regulation.

It was the massive winding back of government regulatory frameworks in the 1980s under Thatcher and Reagan which directly lead to the recent banking collapse. The main reason Australia has fared better than the UK and the US is that we didn't dismantle our regulation to the same extent. If we'd had Howard in power during the eighties, he'd have followed their lead and Australia would be much worse off than it is. The more government regulation is stripped away the more power is handed to huge corporations and the greater the growth in wealth disparity.

As pointed out by Pelican, government does at times go too far and we can all point to examples of bureaucratic madness. But on balance I think we've got the mix fairly right in Australia. There are always improvements to be made, but stripping away all regulation, good and bad, is only going to exacerbate the problems we're already facing.

Australia for example has one of the lowest roadtolls in the world. That's no accident. It's because roads and drivers are well regulated and enforcement is relatively strong.

Regulations such as carbon taxes, water restrictions and sustainable building codes are needed if we're to avoid catastrophic climate disruption. We don't have time to wait for all the denialists, the procrastinators and the apathetic to voluntarily make the changes so urgently needed. Government has to step in and move the agenda forward.

Likewise, with the growing epidemic of ill health and the massive tax burden it's imposing on us all, government needs to take the lead and protect those who don't know, or don't care, from their own excesses - with restrictions on advertising, improved labelling codes and banning of dangerous substances.