A Two-Tier Australian National State

Discussion consideration at a Macro Level: The whole and sole Purpose of Democracy is to do maximum good to the maximum number as described by Abraham Lincoln i.e : “Rule of the People by the people and for the people” (strictly speaking !!!). This is most certainly not happening in the current “CAPITALISM induced Democracy” we have inherited. I seriously mean “capitalism” first and then “any available democracy” within this dimension of capitalism. As George Soros (a former Capitalist turned philanthropist says: “We can have a market economy but we cannot have market people”. However, assuming that we need to get through our lifetime in Australia under this “Capitalism induced Democracy”, hard decisions need to be made. The only way available then “as right minded people” would be to provide this “maximum good for the maximum number”. The need for ‘Economic Rationalisation’ at the corporate level has been going on for quite some time now. In my humble opinion, this could have been at least 20 years aggressively and is percolating down to more socialistic countries like Australia with very egalitarian views on society and social structure as a whole. Please consider the fact that this can never be the “Second United States of America” . If there is a such a race to be run, I think we Australians should boycott or withdraw from this “sporting event” however glamorous or alluring. Now, with rising food prices in the Third World, the much foreseen economic progress could be elusive. We are heavily dependent on the progress of China for our economic progress .We need to consider that China is at best a “Black Box”, which we do not know in any form or shape. Transparency with regard to anything tangible is at best non-existent. Therefore we are unable to feign this economic progress or the possible lack of it anymore. Let us face it, hard economic decisions made by corporate Australia corporate America in the past is now here at the doorstep of the Government of Australia. “Yes”, the much dreaded words “Government downsizing” is just round the corner. I would say to each one of us to “take” this opportunity and “live happily ever after” (at least with the happiness that the correct decision was made at the correct time !!) or leave this for a “later date” and “live miserably grinning an bearing” all of our lives. Question pertaining to the our future generation (children and Grand Children) need to be well thought out by “us” (current generation) with the gift of “extended prophesy” ( substitution for want of better words- my apologies please !!!) to be asked and answered by “US”. As parents, this is crucial food for thought. For a country of just over 22 Million people, I think it would be a worthwhile need for the existing structure to be looked into to re-write the constitution. We should critically examine and re-examine our existing three-tier governance - a bias for economic rationalism is absolutely imperative. There is obviously no domestic political solution to an alarmingly large fiscal problem that we are facing under the current system of governance and constitutional set up in Australia. It is imperative that we need to come up with an optimal - Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to cost of Governance ratio. The current ratio of Governance cost for just 22 million people is highly unacceptable (whatever that figure may be). Australia is unique and hence has unique needs. Therefore, comparisons with other political models and adoption of models from elsewhere in the world, are to be avoided. The uniqueness of Australia is to be duly recognised in implementing a new model of governance be proposed. Discussion consideration at a Micro Level: A national debate or a referendum be proposed considering the following: 1. The perception that Australia is being over governed in the following context: a) Wastage Duplication and conflict between various levels of governance be avoided. b) Consider, modifications on the existing local governments/ state governments and Federal governments be recommended to avoid duplications and conflict of functionalities. c) Evaluate funds spend on governance per capita and put in productivity measures to improve political performance. d) Include constitutional experts in the debate to evaluate outcomes. e) Wastage reduction mechanisms- come up with the optimal Governance funds required as a percentage of GDP with definite reasons as to why that is the best way to spend our funds. f) Modelling off other states or countries which have vast isolated territories like Alaska or Argentina and putting them with due consideration to the Australian context. g) Consider education public as to why a shift from existing norms and practices, have to be thought about – eg. NSW was the first state and needs to be preserved that way (rationality to prevail over emotions). h) A massive focus on bettering lives for aboriginal Australians (A plethora of ideas supplemented by vastly increased funding). Increased tourism with a spiritual focus – by spiritual focus I mean moving away from pedantic religious ideologies and looking at the larger purpose of spiritual existence (could be conglomerate of all possible religious belief system available). In the sense, create a meaningful connectivity with our Aboriginal people. i) A massive focus on bettering lives for rural Australians (A plethora of ideas supplemented by a vastly increased funding). Eg. Larger inland cities with sustainable population with sufficient flood protection and geological viability. [Editor's comment: The author may not be aware that inland Australia is mostly desert. The most populous inland area is on the Murray Darling Basin, dependent on our major river system. The author notes the problem of the Murray Darling Basin further down and suggests that it may be too hard to bother solving. Because candobetter.net is for reform in population and environmental and planning policy as well as democracy and free speech, I feel we have to make a comment here. We do thank the author for his submission, however, which we might have published as an article if the population and environmental factors were more cognisant of local conditions.] j) Conditional National flood insurance Plan if possible. k) Consider historical perspectives and move into/ move away from the mundane old thinking to induce collective betterment of lives of people in Australia ( coming off point “h” above). l) Politicians do not have to take Cityrail to work in Sydney. Even if they do how could they work without any foresight. I mean politicians of either side. Please have a hard look at Wynyard and Town Hall railway stations. How could one ignore the possibility of thousands of people in some form of emergency “say a Tsunami” or a large surge of water from the ocean or an Earth tremor? What about a reasonably tall elderly person losing consciousness and falling on top of the person in front of him/her and that person in turn falling into the tracks ? It is common knowledge that provisions need be made for a maximum number of people to try and make an escape. These two railway stations during peak hour is a perfect recipe for disaster. The occurrence of a stampede is most certainly not out of focus. The narrow platforms and walking space is a ticking time bomb about which no body cares. m) The Murray-Darling river system is in absolute shambles. I suppose in the scheme of things it does not matter anyway as it is too challenging. n) Petrol- sniffing Aboriginal people who have lost a sense of purpose of existence are ignored with little or no support. It would appear that our own people do not matter anyway. o) Apparently, African immigrants taking advantage of young Aboriginal girls in Alice Springs is Ok and nothing needs to be done about this. p) Tony Abott can pays lip-service to the business of cost cutting and will not take the idea of re-examining “government spending on the cost of governance”. He e-mailed me by saying “We are not in power” and cannot consider the same just after the Federal Election when negotiations were going on to form a government. It is appalling that educated people in Australia are obliged to listen to this “toxic verbal effluence” with no substance or future whatsoever. q) No new options for a second Airport in Sydney. r) Young disillusioned voters are “Green Voters”. I suppose this is nectar to the ears of politicians on either side !!! s) Older disillusioned voters looking up to the “intellectually famished” Pauline Hanson to deliver for them hoping against hope. I suppose this is the “manna” from heaven that politicians on either side are looking for !! t) There exists a railway street in Baulkham hills next to the bowling club. This would mean that a railway line existed between Parramatta and Castle Hills (forgive me if I am wrong). This was taken away from where it was !! Honestly, when the whole of America grew on the back of the railway station and cities like Las Vegas thrived on these railway systems (the ethics of which may well be questionable – however, economical rationale does prevail). How could intellect of any form allow railway systems be uprooted in favour of “anything more productive” or even be considered in the first place. Who ever did this or which ever side of politics proposed this is seriously guilty to have even tried to endorse this. Thinkers of this order should have no place on politics. Why do we need this change (more reasons) ? • The impact of new technology such as Nano-technology could reduce need for natural resources world over and there by impacting on a mineral/ore export oriented society. This could reduce our export earnings • Budget tightening is happening now. Obviously Fiscal strains are showing. The treasurer is telling us that the mining boom is not going to help us reduce the deficit. • Queensland floods cut a fair chunk out of our GDP. • Funds for Northwest Railway project and Epping Project jointly is not existent or Federal government is unable to spend the same. Both projects are needed to support a green environment going. • Negative politics and rhetoric excessively played by both major parties. • Extreme Right and extreme left political parties holding the sway in upper houses and possibility of increasing numbers over a period in time. Possible expected outcomes could be : 1. Better usage of funds avoiding duplication and conflict in the process of governance. 2. Ending up with a form of government / tiers of government which comes up with the best option. 3. Two-tier government or modified three-tier governments or large powerful integrated councils or other workable non-duplicating political mechanisms. 4. Appropriate boundary changes to states and territories if necessary to facilitate national interests. 5. Integrated approach to problem solving rather than conflicting and “stale-mate-ism” – e.g We do not have a Sydney Basin joint action committee (including greater Sydney, Georges, Parramatta, Hawkesbury ) although we have several councils servicing its own interests rather than the collective interest of Sydney city. This vastly ends up being detrimental to the planning of a large city with interest groups preventing consolidated planning from occurring. 6. A well defined two tier government with large lean Local governments and a strong Federal government with a “Super-credit” rating in the eyes of the IMF. This is just a very basic discussion paper. I would highly appreciate if counsellors / Members of Parliament (both retired and current) contribute to this discussion, there by, enhancing Its potency and relevance purpose this discussion. In view of repeated catastrophic events occurring on a regular basis all round Australia and elsewhere in the world, I believe that business as usual may not be an option. A two-tier government with a changed constitution including well organised large lean and functional Local government (councils) and Strong “Super credit rated” Federal governmen What I am trying to drive at is :- A major change and overhaul needs to happen to the constitution for a Two-tier government. The most complicated scenario can be this :- Take Western Australia for example. Due to the mining and resources boom, they provide a major share of money for the Australian Economy. Now given that this is a "Capitalistic Democracy", do we need to factor as to how each "Western Australian" should vote in a Federal Election - this could be something like 1.2 votes per person rather than 1 vote per person. This is just a complex example of how things may finally settle. This may increase the population in WA and they may have a greater share of power. But this is going to happen anyway for as long as they hold the sway in the resource boom or for as long as that lasts.