VOTERS NETWORK ACTION FORUM
Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 6      1   2   3   4   Next   »
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #1 
Those interested in immigration working well and who think this is a good idea, might consider a cap on immigration to no more than our natural increase so that we do not eventually lose control of our Australian culture & traditions.

They might also, if they agree, help urge the government to  require English language basics before immigrating  and a 3 year course in English once here. Ability to communicate with each other seems like a good way to make friends and get on together which can help integration and avoid marginalisation.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #2 
Thanks Zelda. 

Everyone: We are establishing a taskforce on this topic. Please post that you are happy to join and see how many others you can sign up to it. The more people who are involved the easier it will be to have government do what is required.
0
Zelda2

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 6
 #3 
Hi,
so ref immigration they are looking at a new system at end of year. My friend is a visa migration agent. Basically it will mean they wont have a list of sponsored occupations, none. Instead they want to grow the smaller ares and rural towns. So anyone can apply for a visa to work in a full time career in a town or rural area. If they stay there and work for 4 years full time then they can apply for PR. 
Just an update on new changes coming......
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #4 
Sydney residents need to decide whether they want a "Global City" as a cash register for the nation or a "Livable City" for the enjoyment of our families, friends and communities. Global cities come with many tourists, congestion, crime, mental illness and isolation but they deliver billions of dollars to  property developers, bankers and financiers, alcohol and gambling industries which also means jobs for others. 

For those wanting a livable city that welcomes tourists, what do others think of:- a ban on further residential development  in Sydney  for 5 years; development of schools hospitals and shopping centres in at least 10 inland cities with rail and air links between them and with major cities; Tax concessions of 50% for people and businesses who move to regional Australia and remain there for 5 years; removal of stamp duty on transfer of homes in inland Australia; transfer of at least half of the government offices from capital cities to inland Australia; negative gearing to only apply in future to properties in inland Australia; immigrants welcome if they are happy to help develop inland Australia; affordable housing to be constructed in inland cities where land really is affordable. That would stimulate our flagging economy!

You don't have to agree. Residents of Sydney CAN have an effective say on this issue, whatever their view, by Votergram into state and federal parliament as well as on this forum. All opinions welcome and respected.

0
Pat1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 17
 #5 
https://www.smhpopulation.com.au/

Here is a Forum on the 23rd of September 2019 at $900 a pop.  How many of those affected will be able to afford to go? Every day the average Australian spends hours in traffic or on overcrowded public transport and they call it livable cities.


0
Bruce

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 36
 #6 
Maybe the first step is to ensure that for a minimum of 5 or 10 years the heads of the departments are guaranteed not to be moved from the current location. Then only those who follow them have to go to the decentralised location to do the HOD jobs.



Bruce

0402537480 (M) +61-2-94030532 (H)
0
Angus1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 17
 #7 
     What I would say now is an addendum to my comments on this subject of 25 Sept '18. And it relates to the much maligned Gough Whitlam, who having been out of office for so long, was keen to introduce a whole raft of progressive legislation - one of which was decentrlisation.
     Much of that govts. efforts fell by the wayside, but a few remain, such as the Mapping Authority in Bathurst. But the biggest problem Whitlam faced was not having staff, infrastructure, accommodation etc. but the sheer intransigence of the very top people in the Govt. departments that were scheduled to be relocated. Being(relatively) powerful people in the public sector, they lobbied, dragged their feet, impeded, and did enough damage that the entire scheme never eventuated. Such a shame.
     So what can be learnt from this 1970's initiative ?  Whitlam, as I state was in a hurry to introduce the legislation he wanted as quickly as he could, and this was the basic problem. With any new move in this direction, the first (not the last) matter is to involve the heads of Dept's and their senior people where the aim is to decentralise such dept. This may take many months, and involve costs - such as providing accommodation and sightseeing over several weeks, so that these people can see that country cities have a pleasant lifestyle (at least when they have some water).  And much, much more.
     What I'm saying may or may not be realised by the current crop of idio, sorry federal politicians, who may not even remember the Whitlam days, or were just too young. Any lobbying that Voters.Network does, should emphasise this little piece of history, and what can be learnt from it.

 
 
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #8 
The Federal Government is being asked to fund massive transport infrastructure like underground tunnels. How inexpensive would it be to develop cities like, in NSW,  Wagga, Orange, Tamworth, Armidale at a tiny fraction of the cost; move government department there with schools and hospitals and give  10 year tax breaks to those moving there from capital cities.  Transport corridors are cheap there. Now is the time to do it.
0
Bruce

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 36
 #9 
i firmly believe that the congestion problems, high density living and eventually the growth of inner city crime will be much alleviated by developing the non-capital city areas [decentralisation].  This would take the pressure off roads around the capital cities; give people more time with families; boost the economies of the country towns; reduce the need for more water supplies for the city; slow down the reduction of productive farmland  east of the divide, and generally be good for our living styles and the economy of Australia.  it would be one of the biggest benefits to us as a nation.  it needs us to pester our MPs both state and federal to take action on this by doing things such as financial incentives for business to move out the the Sydney/Melbourne/Brisbane areas and into the remoter communities. 
0
Pat1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 17
 #10 
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/migration-under-review-amid-growing-congestion-concerns-20190813-p52gks.html
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #11 
Let's have your thoughts on why we should expand facilities for existing Australians including inland and regional areas before inviting in more immigrants and should insist that the government insist on a 3 year mandatory English language course be passed so that we can all communicate with each other, particularly in case of an emergency or disaster.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #12 
Many aspect of immigration have been put on the agenda - jobs, wage levels, home prices, congestion, regional development, water management, domestic, family and sexual violence, mental health, health care and education resources generally, language barriers, cultural understanding. If people are interested form all viewpoints we could put together an action hub on this.
0
Roger2

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 21
 #13 
That is correct! It is not racism just politicians' stupidity! Greed and Growth are Good!
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 146
 #14 
Barack Obama speaking in Germany made the point that people concerned about immigration should not be branded as racist. In Australia it is not that Aussies don't want immigrants. Many don't want our beautiful cities destroyed and turned into high-rise slums like in the countries some of the immigrants come from. The fault lies not with the immigrants or other Australians but with the politicians who are thoughtless enough to invite the immigrants without thinking about who is going to provide them with housing, health care and education and working out where they will live in order to retain the beauty and our enjoyment  of our capital cities. There is a lot of space in Australia. Newcomers do not have to live on top of us and nor do longer term Australians have to live in capital cities when politicians can develop many more cities.
0
Sharon

Registered:
Posts: 5
 #15 
Saying that Australia needs these immigrants to look after our aging population is extremely short sighted. What has to happen when all our immigrants age? We can not sustain perpetual growth! The tighter we pack people in, the higher (and more violent) the crime rate.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.