Domestic Politics

[cadete]

It is kind of interesting that Abbott's unpopularity helped these ALP State Governments in Victoria and QLD get in...

 

And now conversely within a few months of existence both these new ALP Governments with the EW Link Payout and the expulsion of Billy Gordon has seen Abbott's own popularity begin to finally climb... mind you it kind of couldn't gotten any lower.

 

Obviously this has only been on a minor scale and one gaff and all the small ground made could be lost but what will be interesting is if perhaps these bad starts by the new State Government's may lead to Australian's becoming more cautious of throwing out One Term Government's in the future.

Edited April 16, 2015 by cadete

[Deeming]

It is kind of interesting that Abbott's unpopularity helped these ALP State Governments in Victoria and QLD get in...

 

And now conversely within a few months of existence both these new ALP Governments with the EW Link Payout and the expulsion of Billy Gordon has seen Abbott's own popularity begin to finally climb... mind you it kind of couldn't gotten any lower.

 

Obviously this has only been on a minor scale and one gaff and all the small ground made could be lost but what will be interesting is if perhaps these bad starts by the new State Government's may lead to Australian's becoming more cautious of throwing out One Term Government's in the future.

I suspect that state Labor and Daniel Andrews will be so on the nose come the Federal election that the Liberal Party will do much better than last time in Victoria. Also Australian's seem to have this desire to see a balance in parties state vs federal that will be a factor too. 

 

[cadete]

 

It is kind of interesting that Abbott's unpopularity helped these ALP State Governments in Victoria and QLD get in...

 

And now conversely within a few months of existence both these new ALP Governments with the EW Link Payout and the expulsion of Billy Gordon has seen Abbott's own popularity begin to finally climb... mind you it kind of couldn't gotten any lower.

 

Obviously this has only been on a minor scale and one gaff and all the small ground made could be lost but what will be interesting is if perhaps these bad starts by the new State Government's may lead to Australian's becoming more cautious of throwing out One Term Government's in the future.

I suspect that state Labor and Daniel Andrews will be so on the nose come the Federal election that the Liberal Party will do much better than last time in Victoria. Also Australian's seem to have this desire to see a balance in parties state vs federal that will be a factor too. 

 

 

I agree on the balance thing... my own personal perspective is to see strong economic management in the Federal Sphere but at the same time Proactive State Governments who aren't afraid to spend money for worthwhile projects.

 

Which makes sense considering as I am a Federalist.

Edited April 16, 2015 by cadete

[jw1739]

On the EW Link...I heard Dandy Andy being interviewed by Jon Faine - was it only yesterday, or perhaps the day before? - and he kept repeating that the $339m was "money already out the door" by the Napthine Government.

 

I'm just not clear as to what this means.

 

Does the $339m include money already paid by the Napthine Government to the consortium or is it additional to money already spent? What has already been spent on property purchases, rock/soil drilling and analysis, planning, engineering design, etc. etc.?

[Deeming]

On the EW Link...I heard Dandy Andy being interviewed by Jon Faine - was it only yesterday, or perhaps the day before? - and he kept repeating that the $339m was "money already out the door" by the Napthine Government.

 

I'm just not clear as to what this means.

 

Does the $339m include money already paid by the Napthine Government to the consortium or is it additional to money already spent? What has already been spent on property purchases, rock/soil drilling and analysis, planning, engineering design, etc. etc.?

The 'only' $339 million was for the consortium's costs it does not include costs the government spent estimated to be between $220-400 million (may get some money back when/if selling properties) or the $81 million in financing costs ('may' get that back)

[jw1739]

 

On the EW Link...I heard Dandy Andy being interviewed by Jon Faine - was it only yesterday, or perhaps the day before? - and he kept repeating that the $339m was "money already out the door" by the Napthine Government.

 

I'm just not clear as to what this means.

 

Does the $339m include money already paid by the Napthine Government to the consortium or is it additional to money already spent? What has already been spent on property purchases, rock/soil drilling and analysis, planning, engineering design, etc. etc.?

The 'only' $339 million was for the consortium's costs it does not include costs the government spent estimated to be between $220-400 million (may get some money back when/if selling properties) or the $81 million in financing costs ('may' get that back)

Thanks.

 

As I thought.

 

If I didn't know it was reality I wouldn't believe it.

[Tesla]

Here we go, exactly what I was talking about, about time the opposition and the media caught up

 

banks would have him “over a barrel” in the renegotiations of the debt funding.

Mr Andrews conceded a final settlement with the project’s financiers was some way from being finalised

However, opposition treasury spokesman Michael O’Brien said the banks knew that Mr Andrews was already in for $81m and would be unwilling to significantly ­reduce the interest rate.

“He’s decided to take a $3bn credit card from private banks which will charge a much higher interest rate than the government would be able to get through ­issuing its own bonds,’’ he said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/east-west-link-debt-confusion/story-e6frg6nf-1227307090004

Edited April 17, 2015 by Tesla

[Tesla]

Kind of funny that supposedly the Melbourne Metro is going to begin being built in 2018, the year of the next state election. According to Mr Andrews the government has to basically stop everything they are doing when an election is nearing, and certainly shouldn't begin a new project in an election year

[Braveheart]

Kind of funny that supposedly the Melbourne Metro is going to begin being built in 2018, the year of the next state election. According to Mr Andrews the government has to basically stop everything they are doing when an election is nearing, and certainly shouldn't begin a new project in an election year

lol The EW was not debated parliamentarily and furthermore Ok'd by the planning minister (Guy) until well into the former government's term. The Metro Rail project and the scrapping of EW link were taken to an election as the Centrepiece infrastructure policies of the alternative government. The people of Victoria threw out a first term (1st time in 60years) conservative government in a political climate perfect for conservative populism with a %4 swing to the alternative party whose infrastructure policies were front and centre of their election campaign. You Tories (and neo-libs) here can bitch and moan all you want but here are the facts: Labor went to the last election with a clear agenda of scrapping the EW link and building the Metro Rail project. The people of Victoria endorsed this agenda at plebiscite. 

 

Now, I'm not saying you can't be opposed to any of it: The Rail project, the scrapping of EW (and its costs) or just simply want to dig the boots into the other side of the divide. I'm cool with all of that. All of those are valid and you're entitled to feel anyway you want but the simple fact remains that this Rail tunnel has popular endorsement via the polling booth. Nappy's tunnel didn't. 

Just as I accept federally that scrapping the Carbon and Mining taxes were publicly endorsed and passed through the bicameral mechanism due to popular mandate (Tone's Deliberative supply whinging aside) . I do not agree with either undertaking, I will continue to advocate for a (vastly more improved, efficient) form of both policies and overall critique things that I see as contrary to the betterment of Australian society offered up by what I see as a decidedly regressive government, BUT I accept that that was the decision made via a clear outlining of a policy position endorsed by popular vote at the last federal election. 

 

Enjoy the (train) ride, chaps

Edited April 19, 2015 by Braveheart

[Deeming]

 

Kind of funny that supposedly the Melbourne Metro is going to begin being built in 2018, the year of the next state election. According to Mr Andrews the government has to basically stop everything they are doing when an election is nearing, and certainly shouldn't begin a new project in an election year

lol The EW was not debated parliamentarily and furthermore Ok'd by the planning minister (Guy) until well into the former government's term. The Metro Rail project and the scrapping of EW link were taken to an election as the Centrepiece infrastructure policies of the alternative government. The people of Victoria threw out a first term (1st time in 60years) conservative government in a political climate perfect for conservative populism with a %4 swing to the alternative party whose infrastructure policies were front and centre of their election campaign. You Tories (and neo-libs) here can bitch and moan all you want but here are the facts: Labor went to the last election with a clear agenda of scrapping the EW link and building the Metro Rail project. The people of Victoria endorsed this agenda at plebiscite. 

 

Now, I'm not saying you can't be opposed to any of it: The Rail project, the scrapping of EW (and its costs) or just simply want to dig the boots into the other side of the divide. I'm cool with all of that. All of those are valid and you're entitled to feel anyway you want but the simple fact remains that this Rail tunnel has popular endorsement via the polling booth. Nappy's tunnel didn't. 

Just as I accept federally that scrapping the Carbon and Mining taxes were publicly endorsed and passed through the bicameral mechanism due to popular mandate (Tone's Deliberative supply whinging aside) . I do not agree with either undertaking, I will continue to advocate for a (vastly more improved, efficient) form of both policies and overall critique things that I see as contrary to the betterment of Australian society offered up by what I see as a decidedly regressive government, BUT I accept that that was the decision made via a clear outlining of a policy position endorsed by popular vote at the last federal election. 

 

Enjoy the (train) ride, chaps

 

The Liberals were certainly not 'conservative', especially under Ted. Ballieu was left of Labor in many aspects which is why he did so poorly. If people want a left wing government they'll vote Greens/Labor not for a Labor-lite Liberal Party.

If they had been more conservative in social and economic policies they would still be in government.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Deeming

[cadete]

 

 

Kind of funny that supposedly the Melbourne Metro is going to begin being built in 2018, the year of the next state election. According to Mr Andrews the government has to basically stop everything they are doing when an election is nearing, and certainly shouldn't begin a new project in an election year

lol The EW was not debated parliamentarily and furthermore Ok'd by the planning minister (Guy) until well into the former government's term. The Metro Rail project and the scrapping of EW link were taken to an election as the Centrepiece infrastructure policies of the alternative government. The people of Victoria threw out a first term (1st time in 60years) conservative government in a political climate perfect for conservative populism with a %4 swing to the alternative party whose infrastructure policies were front and centre of their election campaign. You Tories (and neo-libs) here can bitch and moan all you want but here are the facts: Labor went to the last election with a clear agenda of scrapping the EW link and building the Metro Rail project. The people of Victoria endorsed this agenda at plebiscite. 

 

Now, I'm not saying you can't be opposed to any of it: The Rail project, the scrapping of EW (and its costs) or just simply want to dig the boots into the other side of the divide. I'm cool with all of that. All of those are valid and you're entitled to feel anyway you want but the simple fact remains that this Rail tunnel has popular endorsement via the polling booth. Nappy's tunnel didn't. 

Just as I accept federally that scrapping the Carbon and Mining taxes were publicly endorsed and passed through the bicameral mechanism due to popular mandate (Tone's Deliberative supply whinging aside) . I do not agree with either undertaking, I will continue to advocate for a (vastly more improved, efficient) form of both policies and overall critique things that I see as contrary to the betterment of Australian society offered up by what I see as a decidedly regressive government, BUT I accept that that was the decision made via a clear outlining of a policy position endorsed by popular vote at the last federal election. 

 

Enjoy the (train) ride, chaps

 

The Liberals were certainly not 'conservative', especially under Ted. Ballieu was left of Labor in many aspects which is why he did so poorly. If people want a left wing government they'll vote Greens/Labor not for a Labor-lite Liberal Party.

If they had been more conservative in social and economic policies they would still be in government.

 

I am sorry but I have to disagree in that the Liberal Government's main problem was not Baillieu's personal politics but the fact that him and Napthaine did not do anything but save money and go on about the EW Link...

 

In fact if you think about it Andrews could not really go into the election not opposing the EW Link as it was the only major policy that the Government went with into the election so if Andrews had supported it... he would have been really struggling to provide the electorate with any major point of difference between himself and Napthaine.

Edited April 24, 2015 by cadete

[Tesla]

Would love to see more foreign aid cuts in the next budget. Of course all the international relations students will have a big cry as the foreign aid budget basically goes to providing jobs for them, but when times are tough you have to cut the most unnecessary stuff first.

[cadete]

Would love to see more foreign aid cuts in the next budget. Of course all the international relations students will have a big cry as the foreign aid budget basically goes to providing jobs for them, but when times are tough you have to cut the most unnecessary stuff first.

But what about the Supra Spirit of Malcolm Fraser?

 

The man who grew to have heart of gold and criticise the whole world... once he didn't have any more obligations or power to do anything.

[Tesla]

Have to applaude the Victorian opposition for committing to continuing to build the Metro tunnel if they win the next election, rather than wasting money and tearing up contracts, once again showing they are the only party fit to govern. Unlike Labor they aren't going to throw away large sums of tax payer money and set back the state's infrastructure just because it's the project of a former government.

Once upon a time the Labor party would have also subscribed to this responsible form of governing, but unfortunately these days the Labor party is nothing more than the Right faction of the Greens party.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Tesla

[hedaik]

Would have been suicide at the next election if the Libs went against the metro 

[cadete]

Have to applaude the Victorian opposition for committing to continuing to build the Metro tunnel if they win the next election, rather than wasting money and tearing up contracts, once again showing they are the only party fit to govern. Unlike Labor they aren't going to throw away large sums of tax payer money and set back the state's infrastructure just because it's the project of a former government.

Once upon a time the Labor party would have also subscribed to this responsible form of governing, but unfortunately these days the Labor party is nothing more than the Right faction of the Greens party.

LOL - Except for the fact that the Right Faction in NSW (Which are basically a bunch of pretty conservative Catholics ) basically have had their direct say on who the Federal Leader of the ALP has been for the entirety of my life time.

 

Also as Hediak mentioned... its a lot easier to support the Government's policies when you are a couple of months into Opposition as opposed to coming into a election.

 

As I have said before politically Andrews would have looked a pretty similar option come election time if he had supported the only major project the Libs undertook in government in that of the EW Link (Even though I am not happy with how it went as I still support EW Link and thinks what has happened is beyond silly) I can see why the ALP made the policy it decision did.. putting the pandering for Greens votes aside.

Edited April 28, 2015 by cadete

[Tesla]

Here we go, Stage 2 of the EWL already revived and 'rebranded' by Labor. Only it's a poverty version. Still not as poverty as Andrews' West gate ramp proposal which is probably what we'll end up with anyway.

Retarded politics ruining everything, just build Stage 2 of the EWL Andrews you cunt, instead of shortening it a bit to claim it as your own project.

[hedaik]

Here we go, Stage 2 of the EWL already revived and 'rebranded' by Labor. Only it's a poverty version. Still not as poverty as Andrews' West gate ramp proposal which is probably what we'll end up with anyway.

Retarded politics ruining everything, just build Stage 2 of the EWL Andrews you cunt, instead of shortening it a bit to claim it as your own project.

 

Definitely not as good as the original, but I'll take the budgo freeway and metro tunnel over just having EW Link Stage 2

[jw1739]

Sick of the whole debate TBH. Mainly because it's seen as either rail or road, when right from the start in the 19th century the two forms of transport have been complementary to each other.

 

So-called public transport (train, tram, bus) has its uses, but so do private vehicles (truck, car). You use the mode of transport that matches your need at the time. To say it's one or the other is madness.

 

I can't actually remember the last time a tradie came to my house, or a parcel was delivered to me, using "public transport"...

 

We need to continue to built infrastructure of all types on a steady and programmed basis and not have this stop-start situation in the hands of politicians whose main interest is securing votes for the next election by pandering to minority groups.

[hedaik]

Interested to hear your thoughts on this one bt50

 

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/major-headaches-for-commuters-and-footy-fans-as-protesters-vow-to-shut-melbourne-down-20150501-1mxmac.html

 

 

"We want to give Melbourne a taste of what it's like to have your town shut down, and what that feels like," Ms Ruska said. 

WAR expects 10,000 people to flock to the city for the protest. 

[bt50]

I'm sure you already know what my response will be...

[jw1739]

 

Interested to hear your thoughts on this one bt50

 

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/major-headaches-for-commuters-and-footy-fans-as-protesters-vow-to-shut-melbourne-down-20150501-1mxmac.html

 

 

"We want to give Melbourne a taste of what it's like to have your town shut down, and what that feels like," Ms Ruska said. 

WAR expects 10,000 people to flock to the city for the protest. 

 

Typical f*cking minority group misleading the gullible lefties. The WA Government is/was not seeking to shut down any "towns." Many of the so-called communities that were identified for possible closure consisted of just one family living in an isolated humpy.

 

Bloody disgrace that these sorts of protests are allowed to take place. It's a distortion of so-called "democracy."

[Hackett]

 

 

Interested to hear your thoughts on this one bt50

 

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/major-headaches-for-commuters-and-footy-fans-as-protesters-vow-to-shut-melbourne-down-20150501-1mxmac.html

 

 

"We want to give Melbourne a taste of what it's like to have your town shut down, and what that feels like," Ms Ruska said. 

WAR expects 10,000 people to flock to the city for the protest. 

 

Typical f*cking minority group misleading the gullible lefties. The WA Government is/was not seeking to shut down any "towns." Many of the so-called communities that were identified for possible closure consisted of just one family living in an isolated humpy.

 

Bloody disgrace that these sorts of protests are allowed to take place. It's a distortion of so-called "democracy."

 

 

The protest reminds me of this...

 

Edited May 1, 2015 by Hackett

[bt50]

"Prime Minister Tony Abbott attracted widespread criticism when he supported the idea by asserting that "it's not the job of the taxpayer to subsidise lifestyle choices". "

 

What sort of fucking moron argues the opposite of that?

[Tesla]

Your above post is exactly my opinion jw, and I think the opinion of most reasonable Victorians.

We need both road and rail, as much as I support the EWL, I also support the Metro tunnel.

[cadete]

Your above post is exactly my opinion jw, and I think the opinion of most reasonable Victorians.

We need both road and rail, as much as I support the EWL, I also support the Metro tunnel.

Yeah - I forgot to do it... but I was going to say that JW's post about Infrastructure was the best one made in this thread for a while.

[Tesla]

So, a Victorian Labor Government has actually delivered for it's voters in the Western suburbs for once

There really is a first time for everything

Edited May 5, 2015 by Tesla

[jw1739]

Wouldn't it actually be more sensible if the States brought down their budgets a couple of weeks after the Commonwealth rather than just before?

[malloy]

Wouldn't it actually be more sensible if the States brought down their budgets a couple of weeks after the Commonwealth rather than just before?

Why (from a politicians perspective)? This way their is less attention on it so it is easier to sneak things through. And by the time someone has gone through it all in detail no one gives a fuck because the federal budget is released.

[Tesla]

TBH the biggest thing the government did wrong with the medicare co-payment was planning to put the money into medical research, people dont give a fuck about that, nor is it a particularly good way to spend a large some of public money. Should have just redirected to somewhere else in the health system, eg more cover for specialists, or towards better cover for mental health, more cover for medical imaging, or towards more medicines being covered under the PBS. Would have been a better outcome IMO, as well as surely being easier to sell. Reduce BS GP visits while providing more cover for legitimate medical concerns.

Instead now we're apparently going to see a cut to the PBS. Honestly hope Labor blokes that. Can't hate on PBS, one of the few social measures that are implemented well, because it utilises a market process.

Anyway, the whole thing just highlights how retarded all the opposition to the GP co-payment was, the system is unsustainable and the GP co-payment is by far the most optimal way to make it more sustainable. You make people pay a $37 co-payment for subsidised medicines under the PBS, where someone actually has something wrong with them, but a far smaller co-payment for GP visits, where a large portion of them are BS, is unacceptable to people. Now they'll either lose a large amount of the PBS covered medicine, or if the measures are blocked, probably lose a lot more in the long term where the whole system has to be scaled back far more extensively.

[hedaik]

This dumping of paid parental leave for mothers who get it from their employers is a bit odd.

Why would a company now offer it at all if the government will just pay for it instead?

[bt50]

TBH the biggest thing the government did wrong with the medicare co-payment was planning to put the money into medical research, people dont give a fuck about that, nor is it a particularly good way to spend a large some of public money. Should have just redirected to somewhere else in the health system, eg more cover for specialists, or towards better cover for mental health, more cover for medical imaging, or towards more medicines being covered under the PBS. Would have been a better outcome IMO, as well as surely being easier to sell. Reduce BS GP visits while providing more cover for legitimate medical concerns.

Instead now we're apparently going to see a cut to the PBS. Honestly hope Labor blokes that. Can't hate on PBS, one of the few social measures that are implemented well, because it utilises a market process.

Anyway, the whole thing just highlights how retarded all the opposition to the GP co-payment was, the system is unsustainable and the GP co-payment is by far the most optimal way to make it more sustainable. You make people pay a $37 co-payment for subsidised medicines under the PBS, where someone actually has something wrong with them, but a far smaller co-payment for GP visits, where a large portion of them are BS, is unacceptable to people. Now they'll either lose a large amount of the PBS covered medicine, or if the measures are blocked, probably lose a lot more in the long term where the whole system has to be scaled back far more extensively.

Try telling that to irrational lefties tho...

[Tesla]

Solid budget. Not sure if much better could have been expected. I think a good balance has been struck. Few things I don't necessarily agree with but overall it's pretty good.

I don't like that they are full of shit about the economic situation. I'd bet everything I have on the deficit ending up being more than expected. Still a few years untill the economic situation improves.

[cadete]

 

TBH the biggest thing the government did wrong with the medicare co-payment was planning to put the money into medical research, people dont give a fuck about that, nor is it a particularly good way to spend a large some of public money. Should have just redirected to somewhere else in the health system, eg more cover for specialists, or towards better cover for mental health, more cover for medical imaging, or towards more medicines being covered under the PBS. Would have been a better outcome IMO, as well as surely being easier to sell. Reduce BS GP visits while providing more cover for legitimate medical concerns.

Instead now we're apparently going to see a cut to the PBS. Honestly hope Labor blokes that. Can't hate on PBS, one of the few social measures that are implemented well, because it utilises a market process.

Anyway, the whole thing just highlights how retarded all the opposition to the GP co-payment was, the system is unsustainable and the GP co-payment is by far the most optimal way to make it more sustainable. You make people pay a $37 co-payment for subsidised medicines under the PBS, where someone actually has something wrong with them, but a far smaller co-payment for GP visits, where a large portion of them are BS, is unacceptable to people. Now they'll either lose a large amount of the PBS covered medicine, or if the measures are blocked, probably lose a lot more in the long term where the whole system has to be scaled back far more extensively.

Try telling that to irrational lefties tho...

 

Greens Voters aren't irrational...

 

They are just more compassionate than yourself when they vote, because they can afford to be.

[cadete]

Also in the Essential Media Poll the Government are up to 48% in the Polls to Labors 52% and Abbott now preferred PM at 35% to Shorten's 32%.

 

Now considering the Government almost always does better as the election comes to a head, the problems the QLD ALP Government is having and to a less extent the unpopularity EW Link Payout stuff probably making PPL wary of ditching one term Governments it is not too inconceivable that Abbott could fight himself out of the hole he dug.

 

Of course no Federal Government should of gotten into such a position in its first term but you still have to give credit to the Government to recover from the position that they were in. If this trend continues then a Mid Term Challenge now looks unlikely which was inconceivable only a few months ago.

 

Also if it does come it will almost certainly be Morrison or Bishop and not Turnbull, I think Morrison is the only serious challenger to Abbott losing his position and I see them making a deal that sees Morrison becoming Treasurer and being the heir apparent if the Polls continue the way they are going.

 

If the ALP truly believes that Abbott is as poor a PM as is made out in the Leftist media you would have to think that Shorten's position could be in jeopardy.

As the Left have the most control they have ever had in the party that they have had for a long time and Shorten has not been able to compete in debating with Abbott in Parliament and is as nearly bad at speaking in the media as Abbott... in fact if  he received the media time Abbott got he might even look worse to some voters.

[Tesla]

Interesting to see what comes of this ewl funds dispute between Victorian and federal governments. Daniel Andrews has already thrown away $1bn cancelling the EWL, both he and the state of Victoria can't afford to lose another $1.5bn.

This whole thing does show why state governments need greater freedom to raise their own revenue instead of relying on federal government handouts. Just move some taxes from the federal government to the states, it's not hard. Just a number of things that need to be solved when there is finally some long awaited serious tax reform.

[cadete]

Interesting to see what comes of this ewl funds dispute between Victorian and federal governments. Daniel Andrews has already thrown away $1bn cancelling the EWL, both he and the state of Victoria can't afford to lose another $1.5bn.

This whole thing does show why state governments need greater freedom to raise their own revenue instead of relying on federal government handouts. Just move some taxes from the federal government to the states, it's not hard. Just a number of things that need to be solved when there is finally some long awaited serious tax reform.

LOL - You really do amaze me at how simple you think the Business of Government can be Telsa.

 

This country has seen nothing but erosion of Federalism for a variety of reasons (The High Court being the major one) since it was first created and no Federal Government has ever tried to reverse the process from either side of Parliament. 

 

I say this as a strong supporter of State Rights and Federalism... but using the words "Its not hard" in relation to this topic are farcical in light of how the Australian System of Government works and has always worked.

Edited May 18, 2015 by cadete

[Tesla]

But that's exactly my point, that theoretically it is fairly easy, I'm fully aware that in reality that isn't the case and there lies the problem.

The way I see it, federal government is always going to want to take more power so I wouldn't expect them to ever try to reverse it. If you look at countries where Federalism is still strong (eg the US, even though it is being eroded there slowly as well), it's usually the states that really fight for and assert their rights, as well as the general population having strong beliefs in favour of Federalism, especially in certain areas (the south), which also makes it hard for the federal government to take too much power.

In Australia, the general population doesn't really care, and I think Federalism has been eroded so much that many people don't even really see the point of state government anymore which makes it worse.

[Shahanga]

Tesla I'll think you find its people in Victoria and NSW Who don't care about federalism. The states who get pushed around by those 2 in the federal parliament care a lot more. Certainly still a lot of people in say qld who wouldn't care, but a hell of a lot more see the value of their own state government than people say in Victoria.

Edited May 18, 2015 by Shahanga

[cadete]

But that's exactly my point, that theoretically it is fairly easy, I'm fully aware that in reality that isn't the case and there lies the problem.

The way I see it, federal government is always going to want to take more power so I wouldn't expect them to ever try to reverse it. If you look at countries where Federalism is still strong (eg the US, even though it is being eroded there slowly as well), it's usually the states that really fight for and assert their rights, as well as the general population having strong beliefs in favour of Federalism, especially in certain areas (the south), which also makes it hard for the federal government to take too much power.

In Australia, the general population doesn't really care, and I think Federalism has been eroded so much that many people don't even really see the point of state government anymore which makes it worse.

Sorry, but your original post didn't really read like someone who has conceded that the Federal Government is never going to return certain Taxes to the states...

 

Also as Shahanga correctly pointed out as far as States Rights are concerned I think you will find PPL in WA, SA, Tasmania, QLD, and the NT are all obsessed with State Rights, in fact its one of the more popular political discussions "Non Political PPL" have in these states and territories. I know that is only half the country but its still a majority of the country's states... but agree Victorian State Politics did seem more like the big time under Kennett.

 

I know you love going on about Small Government but TBH "True Small Government" IMO is as big a myth as a "Working Socialist State"... that belongs in a post WW2 World. The last true small Federal Governments in the bastion of Small Government that you have mentioned in that of the USA collapsed into a heap in the Great Depression under Hoover.

 

Since then under mainly Republican Presidents and mainly Republican Controlled Houses of Congress - Government's in the States have gotten nothing but bigger and once they grow they never give up their power even if its their supposed prime political policy. This is just to do with the mechanics of getting Government to work with growing populations than any Political Theory.

 

The last Republican President in Bush for example spent fuckloads more domestically alongside expanding the arms Government predecessor in Clinton.

To me "Small Government" in the States has even less meaning to when Labor say "Health and Education" or the Libs "More Jobs" come election time over here which as all no is not much than that of a boring catch cry.