Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brazen
I have a feeling that this is one of those topics in which people who live in cities will say 'why change it?' and rural and remote people will say 'it needs to change'.
I think with a growing population, Australia grows by 400,000 people every year, looking at how the country is divided is probably a good thing. The current model of having half a dozen capital cities dotted around this vast country where the population and decision-making is focused maybe needs to change.
The problem of having the decision making parliament so far away from the rural areas, is that you get laws and decisions made which have little benefit for how the regional and rural areas live (e.g. applying metro road safety principals to rural road safety laws). Having more states could potentially put more parliaments closer to the action and this could give greater representation to these areas which receive little or misguided government attention.
Living in rural QLD, Brisbane may as well be on the moon as its that removed from how we live and work out here. The lifestyles, challenges, opportunities, and events in metropolitan Australia is a world away from outback and regional Australia. The laws and decisions that apply to me are hardly ever made with people like me in mind. I think more regional or rural zoned states (kinda like the Aussie equivalent to the state of Arizona or New Mexico) would give a lot greater representation to a lot of people.
I am certainly open to public debate in how we govern this land.
|
I do see your point and agree with some of yours views but have to ask at what cost?
Is a more local focus worth an threefold increase in government expenditure across the nation? That is what it will cost when regional Vic, NSW, QLD, NT and SA form their own states because the precedence has been set so it is easier for another state to do it. Do we really want to follow the US model where they have crap social security, poor public health and a failing economy?
I do not have a city view, yes I live in a city now (as many country boys do) but I grew up on a 20,000 acre wheat farm. Having said that I can see the mistake in this idea and I personally would never support such a notion.
I am not against change just because it is change, I am against change that has no benefit for the good of the nation.
Lets take it further, WA is far removed from the rest of the nation and there is popular opinion that although WA produces more GDP than any other state due to the wealth of the natural resources there, more money is spent on the other states (this idea has been thrown around before). Should WA separate from the rest of australia and become its own nation? If it did, it would be an extremely wealthy nation and the residents would enjoy a more locally focussed government expenditure. It would be a pity about the rest of australia.