|
South Australia
may introduce Citizens Initiated Referenda (CIR) Assist in the drafting
of a CIR Petition thank you for your email and the information about CIR. I am a fifth generation South Australian (mother's side) and have a very strong
commitment to South Australia and its institutions. In recent years
there have been changes here which I believe are detrimental for the future
of this State, and I am pleased that Peter Lewis is trying to do something
about some of these. My first concern is that, apart from having the opportunity to vote at
elections, there is very little opportunity for ordinary citizens to have any
real say. It seems to me that the ABC is providing a daily therapy
session for disgruntled SA citizens and this is very successful because, by
having a chance to 'have their say' and 'let off steam' those who phone in
and those who listen each day defuse many of their negative feelings.
Therapy is good; action for change where there is critical need for change,
is even better. Some issues which I have observed and which are of concern are: (a) accountability the view among many businessmen that the State Government should be
replaced by a structure of Federal Government and local Government
only. I would be dismayed by any moves towards dispersing State
Government responsibilities to the Councils - in my opinion these are all too
often fiefdoms controlled by the few at the expense of the many.
Amalgamating the Councils hasn't, as far as I can see, led to improvements
for ratepayers in this State. Who would oversee the activities of the
Councils if the State Government lost this authority? (b) Laws South Australia seems to be the place with a hundred thousand laws and
bylaws with about 1% of them ever being enforced. Building controls,
inspections and by-laws seem to have fallen by the wayside. How on
earth did those monstrosities in Kent Town, particularly those opposite St
Peters' College, ever get planning and building approval? What are
councils doing about landscaping and preservation of trees? Clearly in
the inner city anyone can cut down anything at any time - Kent Town is a very
good example of how every square metre has been cleared, flattened and
developed - a trend which has continued through many other Adelaide
suburbs. Where is investment in these buildings coming from, and where
does the proceeds of such investment go after properties are sold? When
we have old inner-city infrastructure, a doubling up of building intensity, and
developers only paying a small connection fee for services, who will be
paying for the expansion and repair of these if they need complete
upgrade? (We have already seen the negative outcomes of intense
development in Unley, with the resultant floods). c) Property Investment I trained as an economist at Monash University. One of the
fundamentals of training as an economist is that 'resources are scarce and have alternative uses'. This is
particularly true in Adelaide. Some of the best resources here, for
long-term tourism (one of our most likely sources of income) seem to have
been overlooked or discounted as having any value at all. The current
furore over Carrick Hill is one example of this. Why will people come
to Adelaide if we can offer them only a convention centre and the CBD? Another fundamental of training as an economist is that 'whoever owns the
means of production gains control' - in other words, he who pays the piper
calls the tune. So who owns what in Adelaide now? It is rumoured
that residential and commercial property ownership extends beyond those who
actually live in South Australia, and that many property owners actually live
overseas. Do these owners have Australian citizenship? If not,
why are they, or institutions, allowed to buy Australian, and particularly,
South Australian, property? It is my understanding that I can't buy
property in America, Indonesia, Greece or Japan and friends of mine
living in Greece tell me they can't own a motor vehicle there because
they are not Greek citizens. (they are hiring one from a
neighbour). If it is true that overseas interests have significant
property ownership in South Australia, why are we allowing this? It
doesn't benefit local people! d) First Home Owners' Scheme/Rental Subsidies It has been reported that in NSW some recipients have bought homes worth
over $1m. I don't have a problem with this (although it seems they
could well afford to buy a property without the grant). I do, however,
have a problem with what I perceive to be fraud - individuals who are not
living in the houses they buy, and will not have moved into them within 12
months, receiving the First Home Owners' Grant. It is common knowledge
that quite a few new owners are still living at home with their parents (some
in their late 30s) or with a de facto, and have simply bought a property,
rented it out and received the grant. No one, it seems, is checking
that this is in fact the recipient's 'home'. Added to this, because Centrelink pays rental subsidies to needy tenants,
the buoyancy of the current market for property sales has led to a shortage
of rental properties and high rents for these. People who are unable to
buy a house or flat, then, are often paying very high rents heavily
subsidized by the taxpayer. The tenants are not gaining any benefit
from these subsidies, which are going straight into the pockets of
landlords. Some of these properties are in shocking condition as
well. These are just a few of many issues which have come to my attention in
recent times. I hope they are of some value in starting debate! Margaret Owen Comment from JR‘So who owns what in Adelaide now?’In previous
generations the citizens owned Adelaide.Recent Governments disposed of the
Savings Bank and the Electricity Trust; now the Governments need fresh
outside money andapparently assist in the disposal of South Australia to
non-residents. We South Australians have the situation we collectively want.CIR is one
way to regain SA prosperity and lifestyle.Having safe Law is another way to
restore SA.Common Law is theoretically good but is corrupted in SA; most of
us do not care.From what I have recently seen on the Internet, re the attacks
on Peter Lewis, I feel SA remains hopeless.I have not given up on SA; the
roots go too deep for that.
Last updated August 12, 2002
|