Dark times ahead for ACT

If the ACT Govt just focused on the roads/rates/rubbish aspects of local govt (ie the declining standard of shared facilities like public transport, roads, the little suburban parks (ie not Glebe Park!), footpaths, mowing, roundabout plantings (ie not the standard weedfest), etc) and stopped wasting money on w@nky things like useless public art, policing of Civic shop displays and making dodgy deals with developers, I expect we would survive. Chief Minister talk back is all about the three r’s, so you would think they are getting the message that people are unhappy with how awful things have become . . .

I also think the MLAs should take the bus to their workplace (and a taxi would be fine if they sit late), like the rest of us – no need for all those subsidised cars. They must cost a bomb, so there’s an instant saving.

Update:
The ACT Treasurer has admitted the ACT could lose up to $50 million out of any revised arrangements – but it took the Libs to tell us this:
http://www.canberraliberals.org.au/html/s02_article/article_view.asp?id=912&nav_cat_id=&nav_top_id=55&cookie=y
(Nothing on the ALP Government media release site at the time of writing).

I was going to rant about perhaps they should hold off giving the Catholics $100+ million to transfer a hospital (with, they say, no change in services), but then, this morning’s CT has the obvious solution: sell off more land.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/hume-mill-site-turns-to-100m-boon/1620034.aspx

Wanon said :

PM said :

I reckon we should expand the ACT to take in other places in the Capital Region, for example Quangers and Yass. Then we’d have less reliance on fed govt employment and therefore a broader tax base. Easier for businesses to work cross-border ie no longer will there be different regs. We’d also streamline use of other infrastructure eg dams.

Totally agree, the ACT should annex Quangers and Yass and surrounds. Makes life so much more simpler. Then we can get back to bad mouthing Charnwood instead. 🙂

annexing queanbeyan, yass and surrounds would only create more problems for the ACT, we would gain access to infrastructure, but also to the local council structures of these areas. The outlay that the ACT government would have to make to employ these councils would not increase our coffers, the infrastructure we would gain would include the upkeep of many roads that we currently don’t have to worry about.

Granny mentioned an international competition, if we focused nationally on the positives that could assist the ACT to generate revenue to cover any shortfalls from the commission, we would be able to become far more self sustainable. Generating revenue by raising taxes and increasing parking costs will not solve the current issues that are faced, we need to be able to explore other ways to increase the revenue – or at least make canberra an attractive place to live and work.

with the recent annoucement from centrelink of the plans to downsize the canberra helpdesk in favor of reallocation of resources to adelaide and brisbane, the number of workers drops from 53 to 6, there doesn’t seem to be much confidence in canberra, especially from the likes of Peter Gershon, and the Federal Government.

Looks like they’re about to charge for duelling, accoridng to the ABC:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/09/2680498.htm

Choose your weapons, lads.

Kramer said :

The following CGC paper states that the ACT incurs costs $16 million due to NSW residents using ACT hospitals, which is not completely recovered from the NSW govt:
http://www.cgc.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0018/16542/NSW_-_2008-18_Admitted_Patients_submission.pdf

The cost recovered from NSW is in the order of $70m pa. Maybe $16m is the shortfall, as NSW pays some sort of ‘averaged’ cost rather than the full cost met by the ACT.

Add to the equation all the NSW school students educated here at ACT taxpayers expense – and no, NSW doesn’t pay and neither do the Grants Commission calculations take those costs into account. You can add to that the military brats and dipo kids and come up with millions and millions.

PM said :

I reckon we should expand the ACT to take in other places in the Capital Region, for example Quangers and Yass. Then we’d have less reliance on fed govt employment and therefore a broader tax base. Easier for businesses to work cross-border ie no longer will there be different regs. We’d also streamline use of other infrastructure eg dams.

Totally agree, the ACT should annex Quangers and Yass and surrounds. Makes life so much more simpler. Then we can get back to bad mouthing Charnwood instead. 🙂

PS, Boo at the jealous stab at the free parking in the triangle. You need affordable public transport that runs frequently and on time, don’t just price car travel out of the market.

Just more reasons for two levels of gubmint instead of three, by all means keep the boundaries for the “we’re better than them” arguments but is it really rational to manage things like

– Hospitals
– Vehicle registrations and driver licencing
– Trade and Business licencing
plus the many other things managed on a state by state basis which are common to, I don’t know, all states and territories aka national.

So scrap the bs duplications from state to state, scrap state governments.

And that includes Cirque du assembly

Dark Times + Witches of Mt Ainsley = We’re all going to burn in Hell!

Why doesn’t the ACT Govt start charging utility companies for locating their infrastructure on Govt land………….oh, hang on, they’ve already tried that one!

I reckon we should expand the ACT to take in other places in the Capital Region, for example Quangers and Yass. Then we’d have less reliance on fed govt employment and therefore a broader tax base. Easier for businesses to work cross-border ie no longer will there be different regs. We’d also streamline use of other infrastructure eg dams.