Hello Brazil, and (sing it like Van Halen would) Panama...and of course China, India, and the United Kingdom, etc...welcome to my blog.
An incredibly facetious title based on the premise that 'Two Wrongs Don't Make A Right' that I hope makes both sides look as bad as possible because they both deserve it,...what both are doing is wrong and if anything the exact opposite to what they should be doing.
In previous posts I have covered the Privatisation of Health Services in South Australia by the Labor Party, namely by entering into a Profit Guarantee Contract (my term) with a private company for the New Royal Adelaide Hospital. This means that funds will have to be sourced from elsewhere so as to ensure that this 'profit' is maintained.
It means that we will 'rent' our own hospital whilst paying for all of it, and then in 30+ years we will 'be given' back our own hospital at a point where it will have to be replaced or completely re-furbished. This '30 year lifespan' was one of the main justifications for moving the hospital in the first place.
The sole reason that the RAH has been moved is so that Labor can hand the current site to it's mates and supporters to build luxury apartments for each other, overlooking the Botanical Gardens (previous posts)...it's the Old Brewery (Dequetteville Tce) saga all over again...and the proof is in the pudding, namely, yesterday's announcement of yet another 'Torrens River Precinct Plan' that surreptitiously allows for such Residential Development on that site and elsewhere in what is supposedly sacrosanct Parklands.
I repeat; why has Labor recently replaced all the plumbing through the East Wing at the current RAH site if they are allegedly going to pull that building down? They have used taxpayers money to get expensive infrastructure ready to hand over to their mates.
And following the sale of Lotteries SA, the Privatisation of Forestry erroneously described as a 'Rotation Sale', etc, now the State government is looking to divest itself of Public Housing by handing 5,000 properties to private organisations like AngliCare, which in itself creates many new problems, particularly for tenants.
In a political climate where Religious Organisations are allowed to officially, legally discriminate against people they don't like, eg, gay people (let alone gay couples), or trouble-makers who attack Churches over, say, their propensity for abusing children and then covering it up...(by 'trouble-makers' you mean you don't you?-Ed)...indeed I do Ed, indeed I do...what hope that these people will get 'a fair go'?...
I don't believe a word of these vague promises that tenants will be secure in tenure given that the Housing Trust (Housing SA) can remove tenants after complaints, tenancy breaches, etc, any organisation 'given' these properties can act exactly the same...and without the scrutiny and relative accountability that comes with being a government agency...
Personally I have no problem with being a tenant of the state, effectively in the debt of the state, beholden and answerable to the state, but I'll be shrecked if I'm going to be handed hollus bollus to be indebted to the Anglican Church or any other religious organisation...
But most importantly, these properties belong to the people of South Australia...and as with the South East Forestry Estate these properties are not for the 'wholesale' sale by the government (the sale of individual properties to long-term tenants being a different issue) let alone to be just given to religious organisations.
The 'Free Trade' or 'Market Mechanism' or 'De-regulation' (or whatever you want to call it) Experiment is long over and still we make the same mistakes.
The State government should be responsible for Public Health, Public Transport, Public Infrastructure (eg, roads, bridges, etc), Public Utilities (water, electricity, sewerage, etc), Courts and Correction Services, maintaining the public Forestry Estate that is critical to Industry and Manufacturing, providing balanced legislation that allows genuine businesses to flourish, etc, etc...instead we have a supposedly Socialist Labor government that has literally sold the State of South Australia out from under us to feed the vacuous beast that is Adelaide...
To cater to It's own immediate wants and needs, to prop up It's Union support, to and bribe and pork-barrel and carpetbag and oh my god I'm back doing schoolboy History of the fall of Slavery and the American Civil War...why is it not called bribery and/or fraud, but instead referred to as pork-barrelling and carpetbagging when in a 'political context'?
I digress: the State should run the state at these fundamental levels, and if someone thinks they can do better then they can give it a go, but base line service provision is the role of government.
Mount Gambier City Council has sought to address and/or redress this 'Privatisation' agenda by going into competition against local privately owned businesses in as many ways as possible...(sarcasm, right?-Ed)...correct.
They have repeatedly instigated failed cafes at the Old Town Hall and the new Library cafe (which didn't initially 'lease', and I believe is effectively run with Council support, as part of the $2million annual running cost), and spent a fortune to install a Commercial Kitchen without any public consultation (that nobody's allowed to use) at the Main Corner Project.
This, of course, was then handed free to Councillor' Des Mutton's son, and Council continues to push 'catered events' through the Main Corner...(apparently he pays a fee now-Ed)...really?...(really-Ed)...
With the Main Corner, ratepayers have payed over $10million for the construction of a pointless Function Centre (with Commercial Kitchen) with a ratepayer funded $650,000 pointless movie and a ratepayer funded $1million pointless light show, that costs ratepayers over $600,000 per annum to run, and then still have to pay to use it...and every time there's a book launch or a Council function, etc, you (we) are paying for it...over and over and over...and you don't get a choice.
City Council has spent over $10million of ratepayers money to establish a Commercial Function facility in direct conflict with privately run businesses...outrageous and unacceptable...And this follows on from the Old Town Hall re-development that cost $3.5million (?) and also includes a small kitchen.
Next it was a Farmer's Market at the Library, in direct conflict with the two privately operated markets in town. I take no pleasure in the fact that it has not succeeded as stall-holders may have hoped, but the other markets are also doing less business than usual.
Most recently Council has purchased a marquee to lend out for various functions, for free when criteria are met, which will immediately effect those whom already offer this service commercially...and what about the insurance issues if Council gives someone a marquee and it collapses on people or blows away and smashes stuff...who will pay for that? (either the insurance or the pay-out...or both)...ratepayers...
So again ratepayers money used by Council to compete with private business...and at a time when economic conditions are dire and people are foregoing 'discretionary' spending where possible, every sale, every hire, every customer is critical to small, local private business.
But the crowning glory...I understand that the recent Federal program for 'E-waste Recycling' was effectively 'hijacked' by Council to deliberately exclude local operators/tenders...I don't know why exactly...possibly so they could access the associated funding...
At their December 18th 2012 meeting, under Operational Services Report N0 34/2012 Council made the following statement;
Part b) Council enter into further negotiations with Infoactiv regarding Council's Waste
Transfer Centre becoming a collection site for the National TV and Computer
Recycling Scheme, to the exclusion of other companies.
To the exclusion of other companies...disgraceful...and at their February 2013 meeting Council ratified this, voting to use the Waste Transfer Centre for this E-waste Program...
Council continues to fail on providing basic services, eg no funding for public transport provision and/or infrastructure...Having argued that it wasn't Council's place to provide a Bus Terminal, Council then spent $250,000 on a useless shelter in a carpark despite the well established public desire for a centralised, covered facility.
Mount Gambier City Council seems to have completely lost track of what it should be doing, and is instead obsessed with the Rail Lands Retail Agenda (previous posts), going into business where it has none, and ludicrous elitist projects.
I confidently predict that tonight Tuesday 25th June 2013, they will pass their current Budget with all it's borrowing, debt, and massive rate rises, to pay for things that the City simply cannot afford to do...may I be wrong for the sake of the City...at best the Rail Lands initiative will get shelved 'by popular demand' previous posts).
Tomorrow: Agenda Benders II - Sexuality and Gender in Australian Politics
The 'debate' continues to rage throughout...and I for one, am sick of it...I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...laters...
No comments:
Post a Comment