THE POOR MAN ALWAYS PAYS TWICE
These are a bit like a torpedo in the engine room for the NSW model, IMO. How dare they spend members money on these items? A bit like pi$$ing in your pocket and telling you it's raining...
Spot on. These are worthwhile items, and possibly within the gamut of a license.
Many thanks for digging the detail Chris.
Cheers,
Tim
Carbon Really Ain't Pollution.
I notice in contentious threads that often a voting option which was highly popular at the start becomes no longer popular toward the end, I can only assume it's a result of the information contained within the thread.
Would be nice to have a way for signed in members to withdraw a vote then re-vote or abstain even... democracy in a turbocharged form and with a final result that reflects the reason for posting a poll in the first place.
Is this possible??
cheers fnq
Well FNQ...I am in the boat you described.
I was full in favour of a license until some truth came out.
Now I'm against it with a passion so I would love to able to change my vote.
The reason I would change my vote??
The NSW license scheme is about as transparent as the Logan river during flood IMO from the information I have read here and from what I have found elsewhere.
I intend on living for-ever....so far so good
Seriously - We'll note that a couple of you want to change your voting preference
Nothing has changed through out this thread - the same half a dozen vocal members dead against it are still dead against it & make the most noise. BUT there are enough in favour of seeing change that I believe it is worth pursuing
The NSW system is still only a "guide/model" the expenditure can be driven towards what the majority of those prepared to have a say want to see happen. The expenditure committees are given feedback from their respective areas & associations. The same old problem then occurs - there is never enough constructive feedback received - Until changes are made that are seen as unfavorable - then it becomes a conspiracy
I'll sit down & count up the number of posts per member through out this thread at some stage
Regards Scott
Last edited by Scott Mitchell; 18-10-2009 at 10:55 AM.
This thread just happened to be the thread I posted the idea, i am not singling this thread out specificity and I have paid very little attention to the votes attained over this particular thread but I would like any results to reflect the posters original contention/reason for the poll, call me naive but democracy even at this level should be honest and forthright till the end irrespective of whether my or whoevers view 'wins', otherwise why bother.
Personally i have noticed very specific voter trends in real time throughout threads lifetime almost exclusively the first 1/3 - 1/2 does not well represent the last half.
A few threads I have noticed this phenomenon past....most with a political slant, radio licence, lib/nats v labor posts, snapper, finfish, and others.
cheers fnq
What makes you any different, Scott?
The "gainsayers" are not for "no change", they are generally in favour of Government responsibility where none exists. They want to see change, so that the taxes they already pay are used in the area from which they are derived. "It'll never happen" I hear you say. I say "wait for the next election".
You want to impose a new tax, along the lines of the NSW license, which has been shown by Lovey80 to be a chummy little love in for a few. You want change too. I'm sure you don't want exactly the outcome they are getting down south, but there's a reality here...
One reality is in the numbers. On this site, you are in the minority. If the vote were taken again I believe many who voted yes would change, and your position would be worse than it is now.
But there is another reality. EcoFishers Qld, while a fledgling organisation (which IS working on sending someone the the Sunfish Poofest, by the way) is achieving much and growing fast, with only the funding of it's existing members. No one is being paid, but results are in the pipeline. I will leave it to Chris Ryan to tell what HAS been achieved, and to outline what is on the way (that which can be made public, anyway).
Are we divisive? I guess we are, if that means our members are causing division by refusing to join other organisations which serve Rec Anglers. But the mere fact that we exist demonstrates pretty clearly that there is a decent chunk of the Angling Public who are NOT satisfied with the way things have been done up until now, which LIKES the idea of an organisation which is independently funded, and run by volunteers.
There IS a great deal of distrust out there of Sunfish. You don't seem to agree - that's fine, but it's a fact, baby. They caved in to the Government over Moreton Bay, and will continue to do so on important issues for as long as they are funded by the Government. Up the coast, I believe Sunfish does a much better job, but there are plenty of folks joining EcoFishers up there too. What does that tell you? Maybe there is a place for both? Who knows...
But the line showing that $1.5 million was spent by the license fees on Fisheries Officers is the killer. THAT IS A GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITY. And as soon as you have funding from licenses, the Government will shift that responsibility, and we'll start paying for our own Police. Some of us said as much would happen down South, but you implied that wouldn't happen.
Now the point is proven. The NSW license now pays for things the Government should be paying for, and the Management of the fund can do Sweet Felicity Arkwright about it.
Sorry for harping but you seem a little... well... deaf?
Tim
Carbon Really Ain't Pollution.
I am not in favour of imposing a new tax - I want to see our fisheries given a fighting chance for sustainable management. This requires funding & the government does not appear to have the same focus on the importance of this as us anglers.
If you recon your gunna lobby the government to receive "no strings attached funding" to better manage recreational angling in Qld - I recon "Your dream'in"
But it's a novel idea - Scotto
PS:What was that I hear - that's right - Nothing
You see thats where your data is very misleading and deceptive. Once again, you are speaking like a politician. You have got information from 166 people here on AF, hardly conclusive.
Out of all the people I know who go fishing, I am the only one that visits this and other websites. Having grown up in a fishing community, nearly everyone I know locally is either a rec or pro fisherman. So out of a 100 odd people I know quite well, none support a rec fishing licence. I guess I could go and promote that by stating that with AF and and the poeple I know your figures are suddenly skewed.
May I also say, that from speaking to people at the boaties market last weekend we basically got 2 groups of people, those who thought we were government people and came to abuse us (because we had government literature), or people who came to get information. When we explained to the abusive poeple what we stood for we got a lot of support. Why is it that these people seem to always get excluded??? The boaties market was a big eye opener for me. That sort of public interaction is something that I am personally going to promote through ecofishers, because these people should not have to be an exlusive member of a fishing club or internet forum to have their voice heard.
I have to make comment..who are you doing this for Scott..I notice you say "we'll" in post 397. I smell a rat..who is the "we" ?????????
YOu don't get it do you Scott..we already pay for fisheries items..it is called the PPV..it was introduced after the Burns inquiry..and you want to add another fee on top of the one we already have.
But I guess there is no spot for someone that wants to big note themselves on some board and pocket some funds from the license fee. Your website certainly gives that attitude.
I may even go to the Sunfish craptalk myself and voice my concerns..I may get thrown out but the buggers will sure as hell hear me.
Well were do I start??
All this conjecture started out to be based on the transparent NSW system. Now it's been downgraded to "along the lines of" and then "guide/model"
Your not getting soft on the idea are you Scotto??
You stated there was about $20,000,000 borrowed initially to do a buy out of commercial licenses.
This money has not been paid back in 15 years and as far as I can see no further buy-outs have occurred..sad especially seeing the money that has been raised (plus the usual contribution from general revenue). I hope I can be proven wrong on this.
"I have put all the relevant links up to answer the questions to date & I am just waiting on actual figures to come back from DPI&F on total revenue raised , break down on license sales & the allocated standard budget to NSW DPI&F from public revenue. The license fee is used solely ON TOP of the departments budget"
Have the comprehensive financial statement come in yet or are the only accountable, transparent figures found are those quoted on the below link that was questioned by Chris and others including myself?
I wished my books for the ATO could have been that 'transparent' when I was working
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/ass...rt-2007-08.pdf
Interesting to also note: The total external cost incurred in the production of the NSW DPI’s 2007- 08 Annual Report is $35 519.00. (item 22). Does that mean the report cost an extra $35,519 over what is classed as management costs??
The government CAN NOT spend it
They have matey. Over $1,500,000 spent on fisheries inspectors. They report directly to NSW government departments and have a NSW government badge on their utes. I reckon that's money spent on government business.
I also thought I read somewhere where the inspectors were going to be 'subsidised' by the license fee for a few years. 15 years later and they're still 'subsidised'
How many of the projects funded by the licenses are projects that councils should be responsible for ie cleaning tables, boat ramps, carpark lighting etc??
Councils are a level of government...just below state.
Mate, you say the same half a dozen vocal members dead against it are still dead against it & make the most noise. BUT there are enough in favour of seeing change that I believe it is worth pursuing
I see one or two blokes wanting the change if it was based on the NSW model..one is yourself.
Maybe people are reading what the 'vocal dozen' are trying to say and could not be bothered to re-iterate.
Maybe the couple of supporters of the license have changed their minds because I have not heard from anyone else for awhile
It would be very interesting if the poll had a time line feature.
I reckon at first the swing was heading towards saying yep...but after some information getting out I reckon the swing is going to the nay verdict now
You have asked for other suggestions on fisheries management.
Everyone that knows the Northern Territory alternative seems to agree it works fairly well.
Maybe some ideas along the lines of the NT system might be a good start if people like it??
I don not know anything about that system so I cannot comment.
People see the flaws in the NSW system. Legislated 'transparency' is, but, one major problem.
I intend on living for-ever....so far so good