Page 73 of 73

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:23 pm
by Llessur2002
Hopefully...
Has the result of the next South Australian election already been determined?

The re-election prospects of the first term Marshall Liberal Government have been dealt a major blow, after it was defeated on a bill in Parliament.

No, it's not contentious land tax changes, which have caused all sorts of pain for Premier Steven Marshall.

Rather, Labor and crossbenchers in the state's Upper House teamed up to defeat a change to the state's constitution, which would have reinstated a so-called "fairness clause".

South Australians are still more than two years from going to the polls to pass judgement on Mr Marshall's first term, but the field of play is already being set.

Not by voters, nor political parties, but by three people sitting around a table drawing lines on a map.

The Electoral Districts Boundaries Commission of SA is starting to examine the borders of seats in State Parliament, and if history is anything to go by, its final decision will have a major impact on who will be in the top job at the end of March 2022.

The Electoral Commissioner Mick Sherry, the Surveyor-General Michael Burdett and the Honourable Justice Trish Kelly will spend the next year coming to grips with new seat boundary rules they need to follow.

It is an independent body, following rules set by the state's politicians, who often have nakedly political motivations.

Until now, the commission has had to contend with the "fairness clause", a rule designed to ensure the party that wins the most votes goes on to win the most seats.

No other state or territory has anything like it, and previous boundaries commissions have struggled with putting its lofty goal into practice.

The commission radically redrew boundaries to satisfy the clause before last year's election, shunting several Labor-held seats into Liberal territory.

One third of voters found themselves in new seats, and the commission met the requirements of the fairness clause by allowing the population of some seats to vary by as much as 10 per cent from the average.

That helped Steven Marshall win the election, despite the fact that the Liberal Party actually went significantly backwards on first preference votes.

Labor was outraged at the redistribution, which meant that the vote of someone in the electorate of Flinders was worth 25 per cent more than the vote of someone in Elizabeth.

The former government scrapped the fairness clause on the last sitting day of the former parliament, and the Liberal Party has been trying to bring it back.

Following yesterday's vote, it seems the fairness clause will be consigned to the dustbin.

That means another major redraw of seat boundaries is on the cards.

Without needing to contort seats to satisfy the rules, there is less reason for the population of seats to vary as much as they currently do.

That's a point we can expect to see the ALP argue forcefully.

Labor will likely ask the commission to in effect roll back some of the changes made before the last election.

In other words, to produce an electoral map more favourable to Labor.

The party will argue the most important principle to follow is that each person's vote should have the same value.

There are other factors influencing seat borders, including that "communities of interest" are reflected in State Parliament, and that seats are of sensible shapes.

Whatever decision is made about seat boundaries, the deliberations of those three independent public servants will have a major impact on the campaign we see in 2022.
From: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-30/ ... d/11652300

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:23 am
by rev
On 5AA right now, the minister is saying by 2022 they will bring power bills down by $300 annually.
Apparently the interconnector with NSW is meant to bring prices down.

2022...

The building industry coincidentally is saying thatall new homes should be built with solar panels. I say go further, the gov should pay for solar and battery storage on every existing home, and subsidise solar on new builds.
The money people save on power bills, will be spent elsewhere, generating more tax revenue. More money spent im shops means shops and businesses are busier means they can put on more staff, means more tax revenue.

Of course, if they actually gave a toss about bringing down the cost of living for the majority, while they sit in their mansions on the back of hard working tax payers.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:54 pm
by Jaymz
rev wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:23 am
On 5AA right now, the minister is saying by 2022 they will bring power bills down by $300 annually.
Apparently the interconnector with NSW is meant to bring prices down.

2022...

The building industry coincidentally is saying thatall new homes should be built with solar panels. I say go further, the gov should pay for solar and battery storage on every existing home, and subsidise solar on new builds.
The money people save on power bills, will be spent elsewhere, generating more tax revenue. More money spent im shops means shops and businesses are busier means they can put on more staff, means more tax revenue.

Of course, if they actually gave a toss about bringing down the cost of living for the majority, while they sit in their mansions on the back of hard working tax payers.
Sounds extreme!! But I like that.

Here's my extreme view. Totally abolish payroll tax in SA. Borrow the $200 million in lost revenue for a few years, see what happens. Take a punt.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:27 am
by rev
Jaymz wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:54 pm
rev wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:23 am
On 5AA right now, the minister is saying by 2022 they will bring power bills down by $300 annually.
Apparently the interconnector with NSW is meant to bring prices down.

2022...

The building industry coincidentally is saying thatall new homes should be built with solar panels. I say go further, the gov should pay for solar and battery storage on every existing home, and subsidise solar on new builds.
The money people save on power bills, will be spent elsewhere, generating more tax revenue. More money spent im shops means shops and businesses are busier means they can put on more staff, means more tax revenue.

Of course, if they actually gave a toss about bringing down the cost of living for the majority, while they sit in their mansions on the back of hard working tax payers.
Sounds extreme!! But I like that.

Here's my extreme view. Totally abolish payroll tax in SA. Borrow the $200 million in lost revenue for a few years, see what happens. Take a punt.
It might be extreme from the norm, but this state can't afford to keep pussy footing around...
For all the talk we've heard about how they're going to do this and that, and things are going to get better, we still have the worst unemployment, the slowest performing economy, and one of the highest costs of living in the world.

The cost of living and the cost of doing business, things like electricity, and for business the guaranteed supply of electricity (otherwise it costs them big time to have back up diesel generators), are two big things that need to be addressed in this state.
By cutting down the cost of living, and virtually eliminating one major utilities cost, you tick a big box for many people here and interstate.
By making sure business has guaranteed power, you give them added confidence to invest here or to expand into South Australia. That creates jobs.
People then see there's good paying jobs here, and the cost of living is significantly lower then other places, they can have a decent life here as good if not better then other states with beaches running along the whole metro coast and within easy driving distance, with winery regions close by as well and so on. It's part of helping to attract people to the state.

That and that alone, or something like that, wont fix this states problems. But it would be part of the big picture.

Here's another thought, since our politicians are sleeping.
China has stopped taking our recyclable trash haven't they? That's why we have a huge stockpile of it around the Port and other places.
Recycling is going to continue to be a thing, and a growing industry.
Why not create a recycling precinct north of Adelaide, and bring in the nations recyclables here, where they are then turned into other products which in turn are then sold back?
Could then take the opportunity to move the Wingfield dump and those recycling centres out north, and clean up that land around Wingfield.
After all they want to put housing on the former salt lakes, who'd buy a house there with your sunset view being a growing rubbish dump?
They could once it's cleaned up fill it with industrial lots, warehouses and such, even big green open spaces..

Our politicians aren't doing anything to fix this state, they are just blowing hot air out their asses. I reckon they could all resign today and there'd be no noticeable difference.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:56 am
by SBD
rev wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:27 am
Here's another thought, since our politicians are sleeping.
China has stopped taking our recyclable trash haven't they? That's why we have a huge stockpile of it around the Port and other places.
Recycling is going to continue to be a thing, and a growing industry.
Why not create a recycling precinct north of Adelaide, and bring in the nations recyclables here, where they are then turned into other products which in turn are then sold back?
Could then take the opportunity to move the Wingfield dump and those recycling centres out north, and clean up that land around Wingfield.
After all they want to put housing on the former salt lakes, who'd buy a house there with your sunset view being a growing rubbish dump?
They could once it's cleaned up fill it with industrial lots, warehouses and such, even big green open spaces..
My understanding is that the large stockpile of theoretical recyclables is due to a Victorian company (SKM) having gone bust. It used a different process to the SA companies, that involved compressing the comingled recyclables tightly before transportation and sorting. The SA company that has inherited the problem does not presently have the infrastructure and process in place to be able to handle compressed (and putrefying) comingled waste, so they have received permission to "store" (indefinitely) it as landfill in the belief that "one day" they might have the tools and technology to reprocess it.

NAWMA and Visy are keeping up with the stream of SA recyclables, despite SKM having left the market, but don't have the capacity to address the SKM backlog at presnet.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:15 pm
by rev
SBD wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:56 am
rev wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:27 am
Here's another thought, since our politicians are sleeping.
China has stopped taking our recyclable trash haven't they? That's why we have a huge stockpile of it around the Port and other places.
Recycling is going to continue to be a thing, and a growing industry.
Why not create a recycling precinct north of Adelaide, and bring in the nations recyclables here, where they are then turned into other products which in turn are then sold back?
Could then take the opportunity to move the Wingfield dump and those recycling centres out north, and clean up that land around Wingfield.
After all they want to put housing on the former salt lakes, who'd buy a house there with your sunset view being a growing rubbish dump?
They could once it's cleaned up fill it with industrial lots, warehouses and such, even big green open spaces..
My understanding is that the large stockpile of theoretical recyclables is due to a Victorian company (SKM) having gone bust. It used a different process to the SA companies, that involved compressing the comingled recyclables tightly before transportation and sorting. The SA company that has inherited the problem does not presently have the infrastructure and process in place to be able to handle compressed (and putrefying) comingled waste, so they have received permission to "store" (indefinitely) it as landfill in the belief that "one day" they might have the tools and technology to reprocess it.

NAWMA and Visy are keeping up with the stream of SA recyclables, despite SKM having left the market, but don't have the capacity to address the SKM backlog at presnet.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-10/ ... ss/9243184

Yeh, but China also banned imports of our trash and recyclables.
It might not be a glamour industry, but becoming the recycling centre of Australia would create a lot of jobs, for a long long time. And this state desperately needs jobs.
It's garbage, what, some other state going to start a fight over who takes the nations trash? :lol:

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:38 pm
by SBD
rev wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:15 pm
SBD wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:56 am
rev wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:27 am
Here's another thought, since our politicians are sleeping.
China has stopped taking our recyclable trash haven't they? That's why we have a huge stockpile of it around the Port and other places.
Recycling is going to continue to be a thing, and a growing industry.
Why not create a recycling precinct north of Adelaide, and bring in the nations recyclables here, where they are then turned into other products which in turn are then sold back?
Could then take the opportunity to move the Wingfield dump and those recycling centres out north, and clean up that land around Wingfield.
After all they want to put housing on the former salt lakes, who'd buy a house there with your sunset view being a growing rubbish dump?
They could once it's cleaned up fill it with industrial lots, warehouses and such, even big green open spaces..
My understanding is that the large stockpile of theoretical recyclables is due to a Victorian company (SKM) having gone bust. It used a different process to the SA companies, that involved compressing the comingled recyclables tightly before transportation and sorting. The SA company that has inherited the problem does not presently have the infrastructure and process in place to be able to handle compressed (and putrefying) comingled waste, so they have received permission to "store" (indefinitely) it as landfill in the belief that "one day" they might have the tools and technology to reprocess it.

NAWMA and Visy are keeping up with the stream of SA recyclables, despite SKM having left the market, but don't have the capacity to address the SKM backlog at presnet.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-10/ ... ss/9243184

Yeh, but China also banned imports of our trash and recyclables.
It might not be a glamour industry, but becoming the recycling centre of Australia would create a lot of jobs, for a long long time. And this state desperately needs jobs.
It's garbage, what, some other state going to start a fight over who takes the nations trash? :lol:
That was a contributing factor to SKM turning belly-up. It was compressing the mixed recyclables without any sorting or quality checks first, then shipping it to China to be picked apart and sorted.

It makes sense for the sorting to be done close to source where possible. What we need is more of the value-add work that makes the new stuff out of the sorted waste streams, or extracts the metals etc from e-waste.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:49 pm
by rev
SBD wrote:
Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:38 pm
What we need is more of the value-add work that makes the new stuff out of the sorted waste streams, or extracts the metals etc from e-waste.
That's what I'm saying above. Bring all that recyclable trash here (for a fee obviously), and make it into new products that then get sold off.
We make money from bringing the rest of the countries recyclable trash, and then make money again by turning it (or as much of it as possible/where possible) into other products. And we create maybe hundreds, if not thousands of new jobs.
Win win and win situation.
The only downside is potentially being known as South Australia, Australias Dump. :lol:

But as they say, there's money in garbage.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2020 4:46 pm
by rhino
While your idea has merit, I think what SBD is trying to get across is that the rubbish needs sorting closer to home, or you get what SKM was doing - compacting co-mingled recyclables and shipping it somewhere else. At the receival point, the co-mingled recyclables were not in a fit state to be separated.

If they are not comingled and compacted, interstate shipping costs go up enormously and make the business case unviable.

If they are comingled and compressed, sorting becomes unviable.

If you can find a way around that conundrum, we have a viable industry without a sunset date.

Re: The SA Politics Thread

Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2020 12:09 pm
by Nort
Yup, I would suggest the reason that the sorting was happening in China was probably because it is hard to automate and requires a lot of manpower, much more economical with lower wages.

One potential solution could be moving towards increased sorting on the household end, some countries have multiple different recycling bins. Not convinced that would work well with Australians however.