@ Takius: Planning Question

[Grouse]

Have Development Assessment Committees (DAC's) been established in Vic, for planning applications / appeals?
The latest info I have is that the Upper House rejected the proposal and that it was referred to the Dispute resolution Committee... But that was scheduled to be resolved in "Late September"...

WA is kinda looking at maybe thinking about perhaps eventually considering the possibility of doing exactly the same thing. i.e. discussing DAC's.

[Lellybaby]

you should do what we did in Queensland.

Abolish the upper house so laws don't get blocked

[Tassia]

How about abolishing state governments altogether? Aren't there enough incompetent politicians in Canberra, that we have to have room for the really bad ones at the State level?

[Lionhearted]

^^ good idea - waste of money anyway - But probably doesnt help answer the first question

[Grouse]

Well abolishing state governments will leave a gaping hole in Planning Legislation (i.e. Sim City, which Tak and Grousey play for a living)... Commonwealth has no planning control whatsoever... fun fun planning airports and so forth, military bases.

[Cartollomew]

How about abolishing state governments altogether? Aren't there enough incompetent politicians in Canberra, that we have to have room for the really bad ones at the State level?

Mmm, that leaves a lot of new crap for the Feds to handle, and the possibility of resources from one state being "unfairly" handed over to another.

The current system has many faults and failings, but removing a level of government would be worse.

[Lionhearted]

The way to avoid that though - would have to be an increase in the size of members of federal parliment - perhaps more senate positions with different areas of power - though you are right in pointing out that it could lead to different areas/ states "getting" unfair treatment because of which member ends up wielding a bigger stick (with more party backing) and thus gains advantages over other states.

The other thing would be - Would such a drastic change ever actually get voted into new commonwealth legislation? - look what happend the last time we tried to vote to become a republic. People aren't big on too much change too quickly - not to mention the scare tactics all the individual states would use to try and keep things as they are. When it comes to power - there are not a lot of people willing to step aside if it means they lose it.

[Sparton]

The entire reason for having a bicameral parliament is to prevent a single organ of government from wielding the entirety of legislative power. When legislation from one house is blocked by the other, it forces the refinement of legislation to better satisfy the majority of constituents.

Queensland gets it wrong again.

[Lellybaby]

The entire reason for having a bicameral parliament is to prevent a single organ of government from wielding the entirety of legislative power. When legislation from one house is blocked by the other, it forces the refinement of legislation to better satisfy the majority of constituents.

Queensland gets it wrong again.

We pay for less public servants plus if the public doesn't like something that gets past we just vote them out at the next election and it gets reversed ^_^

[Tassia]

The entire reason for having a bicameral parliament is to prevent a single organ of government from wielding the entirety of legislative power. When legislation from one house is blocked by the other, it forces the refinement of legislation to better satisfy the majority of constituents.

Queensland gets it wrong again.

Yes, I saw that working well when a knob like Bob Brown held the balance of power. Why does 1 person get to decide what goes through and what doesn't?

FAIL.

[Cartollomew]

Yes, I saw that working well when a knob like Bob Brown held the balance of power. Why does 1 person get to decide what goes through and what doesn't?

FAIL.

The alternative is that there's no balance of power and the government just passes pretty much what it likes.

In some countries, the unicameral system works - typically, in these cases they have an unstable coalition with more than 2 major parties (and are also in countries on the smaller side).

In Australia we have two major obstacles to unicameral working well:
1) Everyone votes along the party line - dissent within the 2 major parties is extremely rare (which can often also be a problem in the senate, where members are supposed to consider their state's wellbeing as well as the party's policy)

2) We have 2 parties (one large party and one stable coalition)

We've had a few experiences in the past indicating how our federal government might operate if it were unicameral - instances where there was a joint sitting or where the government held majority in both upper and lower houses. It's debatable how well those experiences turned out, but personally I'd prefer to stick with two houses.

[midi]

How about abolishing state governments altogether? Aren't there enough incompetent politicians in Canberra, that we have to have room for the really bad ones at the State level?

They aren't incompetent, they're just drunk.

I swear I've never seen one RBT in the 7 years I've lived here and you have a greater chance of finding a bottle shop then a grocery store >.>

[Sparton]

Isn't the ACT also the place with Australia's most liberal fireworks and pornography laws?

I remember our neighbours talking about driving down to Can-berra (thus pronounced) to buy fireworks for New Years.

We're asian, so we just went to the local ethnic grocery. Much more sensible.

[Tassia]

The alternative is that there's no balance of power and the government just passes pretty much what it likes.

I don't have a problem with this. This is why they were elected, to run the country. Not to have to negotiate legislation with some independant nob who got there by preferneces, who wants 5 trees saved in his back yard. In any case, if the government pwns both houses, this happens anyway.

My comment was more to do with the massive waste in resources by having this middle tier (State) government. Why do both levels of government have an education portfolio? Health? It's just waste.

[Grouse]

IIRC Queensland has a single local government for the entire City of Brisbane. I mean the ENTIRE metropolitan area. Fun for planning, and fun for residents.