Bundaberg Regional Council - Divisions - Alternative

Recently there has been much discussion on the voting process of our Local Government - Bundaberg Regional Council - due in 2012.

 

There are those that wish to maintain the status quo and have the current Divisions, that split the voting across equal numbers in geographic areas, and there are those that feel that there should be one big electorate, such as occurs State and Federal electoral areas.

 

There are compelling arguments for both retention of existing Divisions across the Council area and those for a further amalgamation into one complete voting area.   A Local Government voting system in our Region needs to be fairly established that recognises the unique characteristics of each of its significant and different areas, a system that produces representatives that understands each of those unique areas, beyond which we currently have.

 

It is my view that the current system provides a whole range of inequities in voting as there are individual and community expectation cross overs of the competing geographic areas whom currently are asked to vote for the same candidate. A similarity is having the expectation that a Brisbane based politician understands the issues of those living in Moore Park or Gin Gin.  That is why we vote for our 'local' representative to 're-present' our issues to Brisbane.

 

It is clear that within such a large geographic area of the Bundaberg Region, the needs and aspirations of those living on the Coast differ from those in what could be could called the Hinterland which in turn, differ from the populous of those living in the CBD and its outskirts.  I offer that the most fairest form of voting process that would enable the greatest equity for the varying community interests, coastal, hinterland and metro' would be reduced Divisional system, yet with multiple representatives elected.

 

There would be three Divisions, Coastal (includes the areas of Woodgate to Bargara to Moore Park to Rosedale Areas), Hinterland (includes the areas of Childers to Boyal, Gin Gin, to South Kolan), Metro' (includes the areas of Bundaberg CBD, Thabeaban, Branyan, Kalkie, Oakwood, Woongarra).  Coastal and Hinterland Divisions would elect two (2) representatives each, a total of four (4), and the Metro Division four (4) being a total of eight (8) Councilors. 

 

This would decentralise the power that Bundaberg City area currently has, create balance in re-presentation of all areas, offer real re-presentation for the varying communities of interest throughout the Region and reduce the number of Councilors. 

 

Of course part of the reform would be that elected Councilors must immediately cease any other income producing activity/employment and become 'full time' representatives enabling them to concentrate on what they are elected for, to 're-present' their electorates. 

 

This is my personal view.

 

Mal

Senate Committee - Banking Competition - Submissions

Following on from previous A Personal View, Australia Bank, many have requested information on how they can let the Government know their own thoughts on the current practices within the Australian Banking System.

I have sourced out the Terms of Reference for the Senate Economics Committee on Competition within the Australian Banking Sector.   I have highlighted section that enables the re-establishment of the peoples bank, Australia Bank.

The email address to send submissions to the Senate Economics Committee on Competition within the Australian Banking Sector is economics.sen@aph.gov.au

IMPORTANT - Submissions close on the 30th of November so send an email to the Committee as soon as you can.

To go straight to the web site of Senate Economics Committee (Banking Inquiry) click here

Please also consider forwarding this edition of A Personal View to your family, friends and colleagues so that we can get as many submissions to the Committee on the range of things that need 'fixing' in out current Banking system.

(a) the current level of competition between bank and non-bank providers;
(b) the products available and fees and charges payable on those products;
(c) how competition impacts on unfair terms that may be included in contracts;
(d) the likely drivers of future change and innovation in the banking and non-banking sectors;
(e) the ease of moving between providers of banking services;
(f) the impact of the large banks being considered ‘too big to fail’ on profitability and competition;
(g) regulation that has the impact of restricting or hindering competition within the banking sector, particularly regulation imposed during the global
financial crisis;
(h) opportunities for, and obstacles to, the creation of new banking services and the entry of new banking service providers; (i) assessment of claims by banks of cost of capital;
(j) any other policies, practices and strategies that may enhance competition in banking, including legislative change;
(k) comparisons with relevant international jurisdictions;
(l) the role and impact of past inquiries into the banking sector in promoting reform; and
(m) any other related matter

This is my personal view.

MalHERE

Australian Bank

Thanks for the great feedback on Edition 21 Bank Balancing. 

Most feedback has been the recognition that the time has certainly arrived for 'someone' to do something about the imbalance between the people of Australia and the financial institutions that have been playing with our tax dollars (Banking Guarantee) for their own profit corporate and private profit. 

Now don't get me wrong,  profit in business is a great thing and businesses should be encouraged at every step to achieve it, therefore more employment, taxes and community benefit.  However, when the profits become so 'mega big', to the cost of the ordinary Working Class Australian, then it is time to start some serious Government intervention in this Democratic Socialist country of ours.  Joe Hockey has started the ball rolling with a nine point plan on banking regulation and Treasurer Wayne Swan has given some hint that he will make a statement on 'tougher' rules on Banks, 'soon'.  Both of whom don't present any real 'clout' that will change the behaviour of the Banks.

Lest I overshadow either Joe or Wayne, I would like to enhance some general thinking that is bubbling amongst the ordinary folk of Australia.  Perhaps, well more than perhaps, it is certainly time to return to ordinary working class Australian's a system of banking that has low fees, low Home Loan rates and branches in most communities throughout Australia.  There doesn't have to be sent to a working party, a senate hearing or have millions spent on developing a White Paper, to create an Australia Bank, owned 100% by the people of Australia through the Government of the day and have our current Australia Post return to what they used to undertake.  Australia Post is in the prime position to become the branches of the peoples bank, Australia Bank. 

Australia Bank will not be the Reserve Bank, it will be owed by the people and through the Government of the day, therefore run by its shareholders, the majority of tax payers of Australia, the people.  Centrelink benefits, (New Start/Disability/Aged/Parenting/Baby Bonus/Maternity Bonus etc) will be paid directly into it the Australia Bank and will not have any fees for deposits or withdrawals.  The Australia Bank will have a Home Loan rate set at a maximum, of 5% and be competitive against any other financial institution for business and investment. It will be the benchmark competitor that others will have to rise to the occasion, thereby creating 'real' competition.

This idea certainly isn't new, those of us old enough will remember an institution called the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), until someone had a great idea that a profitable business for the people of Australia should be sold to private enterprise so they could fleece those whom once owned it.

This is my personal view.

Mal