It is simple enough. Very shortly there is to be an election and the f task is to review the performance of the government and make informed, independent choices from the available candidates.

onthebeach – Not so simple, the two party preferred system favours the two big parties and we get a mob of zombie stooges.

A proportional system would have delivered Labour 57, Coalition 65, Greens 18, Others 10, seats in the House of Representatives last election.

We have an Ineptocracy.

“Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Hahahah Houlley. How do you think you might achieve this utopian state of relaxation and comfort?

On topic: The word limit is not enough to write the new manifesto but there a a few things that come to mind.

First is food security. At the moment Australia's imports of food are growing and my own beliefs is that all countries should be able to produce the majority of their food at home, importing only those items unavailable due to climate conditions or shortages. The WTO dictate that forces or bullies countries into free trade agreements is flawed. Most western democratic nations are now using subsidies or offshoring part of the processes (and not just in agriculture). Poorer nations are losing food production to exports and are finding themselves without food, and susbsistence communities are losing their land to big agribusiness. The positive effects of free trade are outweighed by the negative efffects. The trickle down theory does not always work to support developing communities.

It is positively mind numbing to grow food and export it and then import the same product from OS. The cost is the same either way. Cheaper production does not mean cheaper prices in many instances, in relation to food. Many grocers have said they charge the same for imported fruit/veg as Australian grown, the middlemen just make more profit. Imported food also has to be fumigated at entry. It also has to be checked but due to limited resources, ony minimal containers are checked to ensure they meet standards.

Secondly, the idea of citizen initiated referenda is a good one that would increase participation rather than rely on politicians to make conscience votes on our behalf. While on some issues many may feel there should not be a referendum to make available certain rights which should be a given, there are many issues that could easily be put to a referendum. To reduce the costs, why not referenda put at each general election so the incoming government has a real mandate.

As Australia produces many times as much food as we can consume, I guess, Pelican, that you mean retaining ownership of food producing assets rather than selling them off as we tend to do. Is that right?

Why would proportional representation get us less "zombie stooges"? They would probably just come from different parties wouldn't they. When voters take an interest, politicians do what voters want. How many times, on-the-beach, have you asked every MP in the parliament to do something and not got it done? It is worth looking at the www.fairgo.org website's Politicians Hall of Fame to see how responsive they can be. That does not mean proportional representation would not be better. I do not know. But it would not change the calibre or ambitions of politicians I suspect.

Producer do you mean we, the voters, should pre-select so that we do get a real choice of candidates instead of being offered people chosen by party members?
Given we elect them, what do we really want them to do for Australia - 5 or 6 items from each of us. Are health, education, transport, environment, pay rates, population density, housing, urban planning areas in which we want something in particular or are we not really interested in those areas at all?