I THOUGHT I was well past writing to the press but the announcement of a referendum regarding local government has forced me to put pen to paper.
What a waste of $83 million, particularly at the present time, when the practice has been going on as approved with state government.
Most people will agree that we are greatly over-governed, far too many politicians for our population, and two levels of government are bad enough we certainly do not need another one. That would lead to more grants purely for political purposes, more duplication, blame naming and far more costly local government.
Also, why fiddle with a constitution which is about 60 years out of date? An example of this is the position of Prime Minister, the most powerful person, does not rate a mention in the constitution. There are also many other matters that do not comply with the intentions of the originators.
I have read the article in the Examiner (9/5/13) but what else would we expect from the mayor? If we are to have this expensive referendum I consider a far more important matter should be put and that is compulsory voting.
At the time the constitution became effective, the population was about 3.8 million and persons 21 years and over were entitled to vote but it was not compulsory.
Surely now with a far greater population and voting age now 18 years and over we should be mature enough to have voluntary voting which applies throughout virtually the rest of the world. The question therefore should be - Should voting at all elections and referendums be voluntary?
Comments from local MPs and councillors could be most interesting.