How to Improve State Politics
How to Improve State Politics
Given the current shambles that the state politics is in with 1 party in by default because the other is so damned useless I was wondering how we could “improve” the situation.
The biggest problem I see is that every 4 years we get a chance in direction, now don’t get me wrong this is always a bad thing because governments aren’t always particularly good at getting things done.
This is where my idea comes in. I think we need an act that requires both sides of politics to agree to projects now and into the future that cannot be changed by a change in government.
1 thing that comes to mind it the upgrade and replacement of the original water network in Adelaide (now 100 years old in some areas from reports) this isn’t an election winner but it is an important part of the state and gets ignored. An idea like this takes 10-15 years to complete and to have it approved by both sides of politics which can’t be touched for the term of the development means no side is impacted by it but the state receives an important upgrade.
Other things I personally feel would be better off in this type of arrangement would be the health system, that way we remove the political point scoring and just get it done as well as the upgrade of the road/rail network.
What are other people’s thoughts? Or is there a better way of improving the “state of the state”.
The biggest problem I see is that every 4 years we get a chance in direction, now don’t get me wrong this is always a bad thing because governments aren’t always particularly good at getting things done.
This is where my idea comes in. I think we need an act that requires both sides of politics to agree to projects now and into the future that cannot be changed by a change in government.
1 thing that comes to mind it the upgrade and replacement of the original water network in Adelaide (now 100 years old in some areas from reports) this isn’t an election winner but it is an important part of the state and gets ignored. An idea like this takes 10-15 years to complete and to have it approved by both sides of politics which can’t be touched for the term of the development means no side is impacted by it but the state receives an important upgrade.
Other things I personally feel would be better off in this type of arrangement would be the health system, that way we remove the political point scoring and just get it done as well as the upgrade of the road/rail network.
What are other people’s thoughts? Or is there a better way of improving the “state of the state”.
Re: How to Improve State Politics
Voting preferences can be a big influencer on election outcomes, but it's not well understood nor utilised enough as a tactic by the general public.
A rather influential friend of mine (with time of his hands) is starting a new state political party. He knows he has no chance of getting a seat for himself, but he'll definitely get a substantial number of votes. He'll create momentum for his cause by giving preferences to another polly in return for action. He is well aware that preferences can be directed at the last possible moment - so even a few hundred votes could swing an election result (think Mr X).
By the way, his focus is "the current inexcusable crises in water, heritage and development practices, and health care, including planning for major hospitals."
The 'once chance every 4 years' statement is also a bit weak - sort of like negative propaganda on ourselves. Given the will, an individual can change the course of a govt mid-term, even if it's just in a single portfolio area. Sure, it takes effort - and lots of it. But it can be done...
A rather influential friend of mine (with time of his hands) is starting a new state political party. He knows he has no chance of getting a seat for himself, but he'll definitely get a substantial number of votes. He'll create momentum for his cause by giving preferences to another polly in return for action. He is well aware that preferences can be directed at the last possible moment - so even a few hundred votes could swing an election result (think Mr X).
By the way, his focus is "the current inexcusable crises in water, heritage and development practices, and health care, including planning for major hospitals."
The 'once chance every 4 years' statement is also a bit weak - sort of like negative propaganda on ourselves. Given the will, an individual can change the course of a govt mid-term, even if it's just in a single portfolio area. Sure, it takes effort - and lots of it. But it can be done...
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
Re: How to Improve State Politics
Well, democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried. One day time will be up for Labor and the Liberals will be back in power. That's just how it works.
I don't think state politics is transparent enough. The amount of spin we get these days is disgraceful - you'll never get a straight answer out of a politician, and the amount of non-essential government advertising we get is dreadful. I don't think the media puts enough pressure on the government any more either.
I don't think state politics is transparent enough. The amount of spin we get these days is disgraceful - you'll never get a straight answer out of a politician, and the amount of non-essential government advertising we get is dreadful. I don't think the media puts enough pressure on the government any more either.
-
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:32 pm
Re: How to Improve State Politics
One of the biggest issues is that power had become so centralised in this federation that people are constantly looking towards the federal government and ignoring the states (and knowing nothing about what their councils are doing).
Re: How to Improve State Politics
agreed that we look far too much to the federal government to do things we have well and truley become a nanny state.
I also agree that the state parliment has become to spin orientated. I just wish I knew what to do about it
@ wayno - if your friends needs help with his campaign you should let the some us know, I'm always happy to assist a good boat rocking of state parliment, you never know he may just snag a seat.
I also agree that the state parliment has become to spin orientated. I just wish I knew what to do about it
@ wayno - if your friends needs help with his campaign you should let the some us know, I'm always happy to assist a good boat rocking of state parliment, you never know he may just snag a seat.
Re: How to Improve State Politics
I don't have his permission yet to share details - i'll provide more info soon...capitalist wrote:@ wayno - if your friends needs help with his campaign you should let the some us know, I'm always happy to assist a good boat rocking of state parliment, you never know he may just snag a seat.
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
-
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:32 pm
Re: How to Improve State Politics
One problem is that state politics seems to have become a dumping ground for failed federal politicians- my seat (Newland) is being contested by Trish Draper
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2135
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
- Location: Christies Beach
Re: How to Improve State Politics
That's obvious: get some more independents into the Lower House.capitalist wrote:Given the current shambles that the state politics is in with 1 party in by default because the other is so damned useless I was wondering how we could “improve” the situation.
Considering the huge problems with state politics, I'm baffled as to why you regard this small problem as the biggest problem.The biggest problem I see is that every 4 years we get a chance in direction, now don’t get me wrong this is always a bad thing because governments aren’t always particularly good at getting things done.
Why? And how do you propose they can be changed?This is where my idea comes in. I think we need an act that requires both sides of politics to agree to projects now and into the future that cannot be changed by a change in government.
This is a technical issue, and should not require political involvement at all!1 thing that comes to mind it the upgrade and replacement of the original water network in Adelaide (now 100 years old in some areas from reports) this isn’t an election winner but it is an important part of the state and gets ignored. An idea like this takes 10-15 years to complete and to have it approved by both sides of politics which can’t be touched for the term of the development means no side is impacted by it but the state receives an important upgrade.
Also, there doesn't seem to be a problem. The water network is getting upgraded to enable water from the desalination plant to be used.
There are still the questions of what needs to be done and how we should do it. How do you suggest those be removed from party politics but ensuring they're accountable to the public?Other things I personally feel would be better off in this type of arrangement would be the health system, that way we remove the political point scoring and just get it done
Again, there are many different things that could be done to fix it. If you take the politics out of it, who would decide what should be done and when?as well as the upgrade of the road/rail network.
The biggest problem is that the big decisions are made without any public involvement. Getting politicians to agree to more things in advance is more likely to worsen that problem than to solve it.What are other people’s thoughts? Or is there a better way of improving the “state of the state”.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.
Re: How to Improve State Politics
personally I think there is too much public consultation.
your elected to do a job, given the preference system your never going to get anything done if you leave it to the public to decide considering there could be a large proportion of the state who didn't vote for you.
your elected to do a job, given the preference system your never going to get anything done if you leave it to the public to decide considering there could be a large proportion of the state who didn't vote for you.
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2135
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
- Location: Christies Beach
Re: How to Improve State Politics
Really??? Is there anything you think should have been done that has been prevented by public consultation? Worthwhile things have been prevented by lack of money, ACC opposition and unfavourable technical assessments, but I can't think of anything worthwhile that's been defeated by public opposition.capitalist wrote:personally I think there is too much public consultation.
If the public don't support it then it's unlikely to be worth doing. I don't mind if that doesn't let the politicians get so much done - they do too much damage already!your elected to do a job, given the preference system your never going to get anything done if you leave it to the public to decide considering there could be a large proportion of the state who didn't vote for you.
Do you really support moving the RAH to somewhere where it would take ambulances longer to get to, preventing the site from being used for a soccer stadium? Why do you think the public should be ignored just because the government are a bit more gullible?
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.
Re: How to Improve State Politics
The problem is your assuming the public are educated in the matters at hand. Just because the public don’t support it doesn’t make it wrong. The French public didn’t support the Eiffel tower (or the retention of ), the NSW public didn’t support the Opera house and there would be a list of things which didn’t have public support but went ahead are were successful.
Do I support the move of the RAH? Probably not, but it has nothing to do with soccer stadiums or subjective matters which can’t be proved. The public shouldn’t be ignored completely but given the ease of influence that things like the media have over these things you need take it with a grain of salt. Look at your own argument, don’t move the hospital because of a soccer stadium of all things. So if they said they would built you a soccer stadium somewhere else in the inner city you would all of a sudden agree to a new hospital??
And Lulz at government more gullible than the general public, given the right circumstance I reckon we could convince the city of adealide it is being invaded by aliens. People are smart, the public isn’t.
Do I support the move of the RAH? Probably not, but it has nothing to do with soccer stadiums or subjective matters which can’t be proved. The public shouldn’t be ignored completely but given the ease of influence that things like the media have over these things you need take it with a grain of salt. Look at your own argument, don’t move the hospital because of a soccer stadium of all things. So if they said they would built you a soccer stadium somewhere else in the inner city you would all of a sudden agree to a new hospital??
And Lulz at government more gullible than the general public, given the right circumstance I reckon we could convince the city of adealide it is being invaded by aliens. People are smart, the public isn’t.
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2135
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:10 am
- Location: Christies Beach
Re: How to Improve State Politics
Can you give a single SA example?capitalist wrote:The problem is your assuming the public are educated in the matters at hand. Just because the public don’t support it doesn’t make it wrong. The French public didn’t support the Eiffel tower (or the retention of ), the NSW public didn’t support the Opera house and there would be a list of things which didn’t have public support but went ahead are were successful.
The problem is the public are being ignored completely. The government are under the mistaken impression that they understand the issue better than the public.Do I support the move of the RAH? Probably not, but it has nothing to do with soccer stadiums or subjective matters which can’t be proved. The public shouldn’t be ignored completely but given the ease of influence that things like the media have over these things you need take it with a grain of salt.
No, I think you misunderstand my argument. There are two reasons why I wouldn't:Look at your own argument, don’t move the hospital because of a soccer stadium of all things. So if they said they would built you a soccer stadium somewhere else in the inner city you would all of a sudden agree to a new hospital??
Firstly, the place where the government want to build a hospital is the absolute best location in the state for a soccer stadium.
Secondly, the existing hospital location is a much better location for a hospital. This is because it's nearer the eastern suburbs, which unlike the western suburbs, don't have a hospital with an A&E department.
You seem to be confusing the public with AdelaideNow users!And Lulz at government more gullible than the general public, given the right circumstance I reckon we could convince the city of adealide it is being invaded by aliens. People are smart, the public isn’t.
Just build it wrote:Bye Union Hall. I'll see you in another life, when we are both cats.
Re: How to Improve State Politics
your probably right regarding the general public!
I guess the only other question I have is what is so important about a soccer stadium? the sport doesn't pull big crowds hardly worth the output surely?
Re: How to Improve State Politics
Even if it is drawing large crowds, why should it get public money?
Re: How to Improve State Politics
Is there actually someone from the eastern suburbs who uses a public hospital?Aidan wrote:[
No, I think you misunderstand my argument. There are two reasons why I wouldn't:
Firstly, the place where the government want to build a hospital is the absolute best location in the state for a soccer stadium.
Secondly, the existing hospital location is a much better location for a hospital. This is because it's nearer the eastern suburbs, which unlike the western suburbs, don't have a hospital with an A&E department.
!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests