Every day we hear something about of great economy, the housing shortage, the port's bulid up, oil prices, public transportation, et cetera.
In NSW the unemployment rate is over 7%, and we have issues getting commodities to port, so China can import it. we need an extra port in this state, NSW. i see the economic benifits of an extra port in the state, and nation in an economic perspective.
If the NSW government floated a company on the ASX, and matched every share the size of this company would be huge. if this company were to bulid a high speed rail network from Sydney, to every major town, port, and mine whilst building a port of it's own.
if there port happened to be the largest port in the world, exporting 25 shiploads of coal per day, a work force may need to work around the port. if the government bought the land around the port, and developed it into houseing, and industrial industries. where are the people going to come from? well the people living in the NSW Houseing Commission estates could move up to the port, where jobs have been established. people who are unemployed in the NSW HC could be evicted from their estates, since they don't contribute to the economy in a productive sence, and they would be forced to pay off their house to the developer over a period. the HC could, once people have moved out, develop the land in areas like Sydeny, and Newcastle and sell the land for a profit.
The port development area could be built as a ecofriendly city, with limmited private transportation, and effective public transportion system, a new university, schools, a publishing house for all works, the world's most advanced broadband connection, a broadsheet newspaper delivered every day, expensive drug based products (beer, and cigarettes, et cetera).
this could be the economic oppertunity for NSW, the dissolution of the Houseing commission, and the opperation of a private/public infastucature building company.
your thoughts?

Instead of spending untold billions on building a new city from scratch why not invest in the regional centres we already have?

Regional centres like Orange, Young and the like are screaming for new people, but their populations keep getting smaller and older. This is because there isn't the jobs and services required to maintain the current populations.

So lets see how we can get those jobs back in those towns, why not move a couple government departments?

We need a national referendum "Do you want to keep the old State system of government in Australia."
Along with eight Premiers, Eight Premier Departments, Eight different Legal systems and Policing Authorities.
Eight Health,Ambulance,and Fire services.
Eight different medical,legal and Educational services that will not allow the qualified from one state to work in another.
The cost of running eight different systems is so antique that any one who returns to Australia in centuries hence will laugh at how we have all been conned into believing that our system was even used.
The quicker we come to our senses and adopt the Ken Thomas plan (founder of TNT transport.)of 40 regional super Councils that collect taxes on behalf of the central government who then redistibute the wealth as happens currently but without the greedy State Premiers thinking it is their own personal monies as happens today.

Brock so what you seem to be advocating is turning 8 states into 40. How exactly is this meant to be cutting down on red tape and government again?

You're also talking about practically writing a new constitution. There are so many more issues involved with than just the creation of super councils.

I agree that both the Federal and State Governments should be actively pursuing a regional development program. Our cities are overcrowded and inefficient. Some incentives would obviously be needed to encourage the sheepish city dwellers to consider a move to the country. Perhaps lower tax rates for people in the bush. Relocating Government departments to regional areas would also be helpful in attracting young graduates and professionals.

For too long our politicians have encouraged unfettered population growth without any planning or even justification. It's time for a bit of leadership and vision from the top. What ever happened to nation building?

James & Dresdener, I couldn't agree more. It would add a bit of equity into government spending, as well.

Currently the capital cities act like vast sponges, sucking all the wealth, produced by the whole state, to themselves, to feed the huge bureaucracies the states have concentrated there.
The wealth is then followed by the country kids, when there is no wealth left, to employ them at home.

Not only would it help the bush, but it just may prevent the cities becoming completely unlivable.

why not rewrite the consistution? sure, n one will ever vote rom it since we're all far too conservitive, but we might as well become a republic, or even and islamic state. it's not going to happen; i will to remove most froms of socialism in this nation; see what it's doing to aboriginal communities, or the unemployed in the houseing commission estates.
The reason i preposed a new city is that 24% of Sydney's population lives in a Housing Commission Estate(2006 census) with simmilar rates in other cities, and regional centres. also the act that unemployment is around 12% (if you work 1-5 hour a week your not employed and contibuting every day of the week 8 - 5; the governemt says 4% just to look good)
also a need port is required, and a high speed transportion system. if you can travel 320km/h by train from Paris to Antwerp, why can't we do it from Sydney to Newcastle, Sydney to Melbourne, Brisbaine, or a 10 hour trip to Perth non stop.
if the pubic, or the private sector ran trips from WA to NSW, or VIC to NSW, QLD to NSW, Sydney Airport might not be battling with the world's 3rd most traveled routes, Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne.
what has the Governemt done to improve the economy through infastructure? nothing! If Mr Rudd could develop a interstate transportional system, approve uranium mining and power plants, improove all major capital's mass transit systems, and pleadge around $3 billion to Hydrogen technology for fuel cells and other hydrogen based technological adventage and the world's fastest, and cheapest broadband connection he would have all the seats in government. where can he get the money, the new company "the commonwealth mining, exploration, development and infastructural corporation" if Rudd exploits the mining boom, and builds infastructure whilst fining a hydrogen based solution to the peak oil crisis.

Interesting that you claim to want to do away with socialism and yet tout the high speed transport network of two socialist nations.

We do not need a new port, we need our current ports to be upgraded. Yes infrastructure needs to be built, but you cannot spend money on both building a new city and upgrading the existing infrastructure.

On the subject of nuclear power, I'm sorry but I'm going to have to disagree with you on that as well. To my mind, its too expensive, to dangerous (we do not know how to deal with the waste among many other things), and too big a target for all those terrorists the government keeps telling us about.

There are safer alternatives to nuclear power and I would much rather go down that road.

The upgrading of coal loading in Newcastle will begin in just weeks.
We can hardly load coal in Orange, the bottle neck if it is not now is about to be the railway.
This is a clear need in both rural and interstate lines duplicate existing rail lines and build more.
While we truly must invest in infrastructure in rural centers ,we must face the fact some people just do not want to live there.
Jobs with meaning and a future for the youth who leave in numbers for the city's is a start.
Our love of the sea is not going any place soon and inland jobs could offer sea side holidays without much cost, after all in my area football clubs own whole blocks of such accommodation.

Belly,

The generation of real jobs is the key really. A few years ago, the option of moving various state government department headquarters out into the regional areas was floated as a way of doing this. I think it should be explored again. If a big employer settles in a town, then it tends to attract others to service its employees and so on.

The other thing to consider is that regional centres could compete with metro areas through things like real infrastructure upgrades (telecommunications would have to be at the top of that list).

Real jobs may involve more than shifting government department to the bush.
It has taken place in NSW very often and the attracting firms to rural areas is well under way here already.
My idea about new rail lines and duplication of existing ones will speed up that process.
Freight is much safer on rail than roads and cheaper too, such inland lines opens up the chances for new jobs.
Exporting needs rail, ports and air based transport to be cost affective rail seems to be cheaper than road.
We need to understand the jobs we create will need workers, do we continue to bring the worlds poor to work for a time or more migration?
Yes it opens Pandora's box but this country must and will move inland to do that we will need people.
We too can not overlook the idea of subsidized holidays by the sea.
Already public servants are nothing less than bribed to work inland in NSW and it works.

Liberalcynic,
For someone with such an opinion on economic infrastructure, I am curious, do you have access to a spellchecker?

I am not doing too bad Goddess you see I left school as the eldest of a very big family long before I learned to read or write.
However like you I am inquisitive can you tell me do you know what a taxidermist does for a living?