That's a lot of independents. Maybe Stu is onto something.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/NSW-business-dreads-hung-parliament/2007/02/16/1171405378519.html

A NSW business lobby group has asked the state's independent MPs to reveal how they would act if a hung parliament is returned at the March 24 state election.

There are ten independent MPs in the lower house of the NSW parliament and several high-profile mayors are standing as independent candidates at the election.

Mr MacDonald said the business community wanted assurances the independents would allow a minority administration to govern without hindrance.

"Ten to twelve back seat drivers is a sure-fire recipe for disaster," he said.

I reckon all state governments should all be dissolved and never re-formed.
Our country should be governed by federal only,and then all of the bullshit between the states will end.
it would also mean less pollies and the millions of tax dollars that were destined for those dismissed state pollies will find themselves headed for public utilitys. This time the money would actually be serving the people and not funding the state pollies bmw's, holidays and sydney north shore mansions.

Interesting situation.

Freediver wrote:

Quote:

That's a lot of independents. Maybe Stu is onto something.

Indeed. I think people are beginning to lose faith in the traditional parties and are moving onto the alternative parties/independents. Go Pauline! You can duuuu iitttttt

But at the end of the day, independents have no impact, do they? They don't form Government and merely list their preferences for which major party they want to win the election. Is that not right?




Quote:

I reckon all state governments should all be dissolved and never re-formed.

Agreed. State Governments are useless and are just a testament to a divided Australia.

One benefit of them is that they help achieve a balance of power. Putting all the power in the hands of the federal government is all well and good - until it goes to their head.

Hello All, this is my first post here. I have been looking for an Australian political forum for some time where I can discuss things with like-minded people. I hope this is it.

I would like to see the independants put their politics on the table and vote with/against legislation on an issue by issue basis. Of course, what will actually happen is that these independants will align themselves with a government and use that loyal alignment to make their constituents - and their own self-interest - happy.

The problem is - how many of these people can actually describe their politics? It used to be simple - we had left and right. What happenned to the Classic Liberalism that existed in the 1950s? How did religious based moralism become so entrenched in the right - to the point where they ignore their liberalism roots and actively  make legislation which infringes on people's freedom? How did the left allow manufacturing in this country to be snubbed out of existence - despite the large number of blue-collar workers which were their most loyal followers? Perhaps the general public are just too apathetic, and too keen to grab what pitiful offerings are being made.

Thanks for reading,
spacscilib

[quote author=freediver link=1171585155/0#0 date=1171585155]That's a lot of independents. Maybe Stu is onto something.

Now your starting to get it

now members and candidates

www.tapp.org.au

stu

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Marginal-seats-dilemma-for-Premier-Iemma/2007/03/04/1172943280778.html

Five marginal Labor seats are set to fall in the NSW election, and two more are line-ball, leaving the Iemma government in a neck and neck race to retain a majority, polls show.

Labor is set to lose the seats of Camden, Riverstone, Menai, Miranda and Port Stephens, the poll says.

The seats of Penrith and Tweed are considered line-ball, and the loss of one more seat would cost the government its majority, forcing it to seek support from independents.

wrote on Feb 16^th, 2007 at 2:57pm:

I reckon all state governments should all be dissolved and never re-formed. Our country should be governed by federal only,and then all of the bullshit between the states will end. it would also mean less pollies and the millions of tax dollars that were destined for those dismissed state pollies will find themselves headed for public utilitys. This time the money would actually be serving the people and not funding the state pollies bmw's, holidays and sydney north shore mansions.

Dude, damn I hate this line of argument...

First thing, Australia is a big place, different policy is needed to address the seriously different needs of the different areas. I have enough trouble putting up with Sydney oriented policy in rural NSW, let alone something geared towards Melbourne or Perth or dry ass Adelaide.

Secondly, HOW do you figure that simply removing the state governments will save a single dollar?? Do you have any idea how much of the country is managed at a state level? dirty stuff that the feds are not interested in either. Schools, hospitals, police, roads and transport, water, land... yeah, sacking the states will make all those expenses just go away ::) Think of the number of people needed to manage all that stuff, if the politicians are taken out of the equation they will just be replaced by federally appointed partisan public servants who we as the voters can't vote in or out anymore... geez sounds like a great idea to me...

Quote:

Our country should be governed by federal only,and then all of the bullshit between the states will end.

The Constitution never intended for so much power to be vested at a federal level. The idea was that only when the states relinquish power should the federal government be allowed to legislate. Successive federal governments have learnt to bypass the system by stealth, such as IR, telecoms and tax. For example, taxing powers were gained by the federal government via its defence powers, to fund Australia's WWII effort.

The end result is duplicity of service, conflicting laws and buck-passing. And a huge waste of money.

AUShole wrote on Mar 10^th, 2007 at 8:12am:

Quote: Our country should be governed by federal only,and then all of the bullshit between the states will end. The Constitution never intended for so much power to be vested at a federal level. The idea was that only when the states relinquish power should the federal government be allowed to legislate. Successive federal governments have learnt to bypass the system by stealth, such as IR, telecoms and tax. For example, taxing powers were gained by the federal government via its defence powers, to fund Australia's WWII effort. The end result is duplicity of service, conflicting laws and buck-passing. And a huge waste of money.

Damn straight!

Most people don't understand that it is the states that hold the higher sovereign authority in this country - much like the USA. You see federation exists because the states agreed to it existing. State parliments have more history in this country than the federation, for example the oldest democratic institution we have is the NSW parliment, not the federal. As I understand it the states could *theoretically* walk away from the federal constitution, it would be dirty and messy and quite pointless but in theory I don't see why they can't (apart from the feds holding all military power...).

Again like I said before, much of what the states control is dirty costly stuff that the feds don't want anyway, cut them some slack they really do bear the greater burden of Australian services!

The states have failed misreably to manage the Murray Darling effectively. The are like a bunch of children fighting over sweets - whoever grabs the biggest handful first gets more. The sooner the federal government takes over that the better.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Speedowearing-comedian-confronts-Debnam/2007/03/19/1174152947020.html

NSW Opposition Leader Peter Debnam has been confronted by a speedo-wearing comedian while

He played carpet bowls and shot some pool, with less than impressive results.

"Not enough porridge for breakfast," remarked one female bowler when Mr Debnam's bowl stopped well short of the mark.

Mr Debnam arrived to be confronted by a half-naked Craig Reucassel from ABC TV's satirical program The Chaser.

Obviously making fun of Mr Debnam's repeated appearances in his swimwear throughout the campaign, Reucassel, wearing a pair of red speedos and a white baseball cap, was quickly cut off by two bodyguards.

When the cameras remained focused on him rather than Mr Debnam, Reucassel said, "Sorry, I'm not Peter Debnam, he's over there".

"Just because I'm wearing this doesn't mean I'm Peter Debnam," he said.

Ok, continue, im listening.