VOTERS NETWORK ACTION FORUM
Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 3 of 5      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   Next
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 148
 #31 
Quite right Bruce. We scheduled this topic to end on September 30th which it will do. I hope Angus will update his excellent summary then we will put forward all the points made and vote on which should be included in the campaign.
0
Bruce

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 34
 #32 
This topic keeps re-occurring.  Time to take some more positive action i think.
We need to come up with a short list of actions we want Government to take that fit in with an overall strategy we want government to take.  we sort of got 1/2 way there a couple of months ago and then somehow we dropped the ball.  let's collect some ideas together, then the hub leaders have a chat and come up with a proposal for the rest of us.
what do the rest of you think?
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 148
 #33 
Wisdom from the new PM. Mr. Morrison said that there are some places that need more people and others that don't. Sydney needs less and about 50 inland cities need more. There are jobs galore in that proposition and when they borrow $1 million less for a home inland, home buyers can afford to earn about $1,000 a week less and still have the same disposable income. When the city is too expensive the wise young people go inland where a traffic jam might last 3 minutes and people are much more friendly. It is a great place for kids to grow up.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 148
 #34 
Voter backlash is causing the NSW govt to "put the brakes on" according to SMH. Voters should ring their state MPs and tell them that the rail issue is about absurdly high population numbers. Tax incentives and government investments should be made inland, not in Sydney. Otherwise voters should campaign in marginal electorates for candidates who want a ban on any future residential construction in Sydney matched by inland construction equal to or greater than what was to be done in Sydney. That will take plenty of jobs inland.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 148
 #35 
Roger,  Politicians do get it. They just don't care.

The Planning Department is much to blame. It couldn't plan a child's birthday party. The Peter Principle in Politics is that governments keep incfreasing the population until they exceed the number they have the ability to govern. Look at Sydney rail. The rail and road systems just cannot cope because MPs and bureacrats cannot cope.
0
Bruce

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 34
 #36 
agreed, Sharon, and it can be done.  our biggest employer is government which can play its part by moving parts of the public administration out to what we probably call a rural metropolis, and there are lots of them that can be used.  half the problem is that the civil servants see moving to HQ in the capitals is the way to go to 'be at the centre of things'.  government could run its 'business' perfectly well outside the capital cities.  just think - we moved our government businesses to a rural town called Canberra back in the days before we were born.  all things are possible if you have the will power to do it.  business's would do it with the correct incentives such as tax relief to go there, and tax penalties to stay in the capitals.
0
Sharon

Registered:
Posts: 5
 #37 
Greg, I think the moving population out will bring infrastructure is back to front... it takes generations before infrastructure starts to appear. I realise it is impractical to put infrastructure in first (think Kevin Costner “if you build it, they will come”) 😂 but THAT is the answer, it’s risky, but that’s how it would have to happen. Worked in Dubai!
0
Roger2

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 28
 #38 

Politicians just don’t get it. Sydney is FULL.

See The Sun-Herald Editorial Sunday 12 August 2018 for a short  review. I question the last statement that “This time tomorrow, there will be another 400 Sydneysiders”. Not true. Maybe 400 new Australians. You have to be careful quoting population/immigration statistics because visa holders including students are counted. They were talking about a ’30-minute city’. Now that has been reduced to the ‘20-minute city’! This is just not going to happen! Planners and politicians are out of touch with the community and have these ideal dreams!

The newspaper mentions that those who cannot afford to live in Sydney are nurses, teachers, police, youth, long-term renters, single & divorced people who have all been frozen out of the housing market. That is a huge number of resident voters.  The incessant flow of people is madness and is destroying our way of life and our environment. Sydney is quoted (SMH 28 July 2018) as gaining 84,700 people from overseas migration in the year ended June 2017.  That is over 230 every single day! No wonder housing prices have gone up and infrastructure is stretched beyond capacity.  The simple answer is to STOP immigration but no one will do that, so we must reduce immigration to a previous level of about 80,000 per year if that. Note: Sydney absorbs over 200 people every single day. That is the madness we have to stop.  This is where our problems such as school, transport, housing and road overcrowding starts. Then there is the environment.

0
Bruce

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 34
 #39 
I think we have two issues evolving here.  One is the development of our country areas away from the capital cities, and this means country towns.  The other is the immigration issue and how many people can Australia support and sustain.  They are surely interrelated, but to get anywhere in persuading politicians to do what we want I think we have to treat them separately.
So, as this forum started out by talking about immigration, lets keep it on immigration and what we want to do about it.  By all means use populating rural areas as an argument for or against it, but i think we need a separate forum on decentralisation. 
What do others think?
0
Roger2

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 28
 #40 
Let's focus on the basics for life - water, food, health, education and safety of our children. In Australia because of our isolation and size we need to act in a sustainable way and look after our land and our people. These hould be the priorities. You have to ask what it means to be an Australian if you want to live in Australia - fairgo, equity, opportunity and freedom. This country was founded by pioneers and fought for by tens of thousands of men and women commemorated on Anzac Day with our New Zealand cousins. NEVER forget that.
0
Zelda2

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 5
 #41 
The main issue is the difficulties now people face with skill as they have changed immigration law and made it extremely expensive for anyone to even apply and now the wait time to get a visa approved can take up to 2 years with a huge possibility it won't be granted. However if you have plenty of money from overseas you can buy yourself in. A tad unfair to skilled people
0
Marian2

Registered:
Posts: 1
 #42 
Hello Everyone,

My experience of living in a large country town is not recent so I will offer comment with that caveat in mind.

Decentralisation seems an admirable concept, and perhaps Australian born families could lead by example and relocate.

Native speakers of English would be in a better position to ask for the services they need as they already have knowledge

of their entitlements and expectations in regard to health, education and infrastructure.

Perhaps in this way the regional areas would be able to boost their populations with those who can integrate seamlessly

and maintain the lovely towns and "the Australia we knew".

Thank you Marian
0
Roger2

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 28
 #43 
Sharon is right. I applaud her especially on her personal comment about dual citizenship. We don't understand daily rural life. It is what is left of the Australia we knew. Tourism compounds the problem. All growth is not good. Politicians need to stand up for Australia and Australian families especially in rural areas. Money doesn't follow the population numbers. It follows big business and the big end of town and mates. Politicians are caught in the election cycle with no medium to long term vision or motivation. Public funds should be used to fund the basic cost of elections with longer terms to get donations out of what is a wasting two party system. Failed politicians should pay the price if they cause an election through pure stupidity.  
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 148
 #44 
Fair comment Sharon. What do others think? Many in the bush would like decent medical care closer than a day's drive. Many would like better schools and off-farm jobs and sealed roads. That comes with population numbers. Many young Australians could live inland without distrubing the quiet and could buy more afordable homes. There does not always have to be a huge youth leakage to the city. The MIA is full of migrant families and that works well. How could Murray Bridge have been handled better? More views please and thank you Sharon for giving us yours. You may have more to offer and it would be very welcome.
0
Sharon

Registered:
Posts: 5
 #45 
I think pushing the problem out of the cities, is inflicting your problems on country areas. We (I speak for the rural areas) like our quiet, country life. Putting a people, who do not want to integrate, into a less populated area, and the effects will be felt harder and faster. Also, there is less policing, transport and infrastructure outside of capital cities. If you think the government will give money in accordance with population, you haven’t been paying attention. A prime example is Murray Bridge, a lovely riverside town, popular with tourists, well it used to be, before they brought in mass African immigrants. The town looks awful now. Not touristy at all!

The issue is, Australia can NOT sustain the current population growth. The authorities are too flaccid and unwilling to deal with the issues where they are. Our rainfall isn’t enough to sustain the current population and too many immigrants are relying on our social security system, without ever having contributed.

Personally, I like the probation idea. As well as, no social security unless you have contributed to the economy via tax, exemptions for disabled people born here. Three strikes and you’re out for dual citizens (this would affect me) for violent crimes (those resulting in actual bodily injuries, hurt feelings don’t count). And ban the burka and the niqab, these articles of clothing are contrary to our culture, climate and attitudes to women.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.