Whilst I applaud your efforts to come up with viable alternatives to closures which you can present to the pollies, it is vitally important that you understand the political process through which these proposals will go.
Gary Fooks is right; the subject matter is getting off course. The potical process does not allow for you to make alternative suggestions. I know this doesnt sound nice but its the truth. I will demonstrate this for you - but for those who wont read beyond these next lines - know this: It doesnt matter how good or how valid or well thought out your alternative proposals are - they arent worth anything (as yet) at the governement level.
The Governement isnt looking for alternatives - they are looking to shore up their own positions and they believe they can do this by placating to the extreme greens. What we have to do is prove to them that they are wrong. The ONLY way to prove to them that they are wrong is to threaten their voter base. #So we must show them that if they pursue this option - their jobs are in jeopardy.
Let me enlighten you as to the political process and why I say that alternatives are no use (yet).
When legislation is passed by an act of parliament, it is first "read" and debated in "the house" the subject of the debate is the terms of the legislation, there is rarely an opportunity to suggest alternative approaches here. #If the terms of the legislation dont survive the first reading and consequent voting they can then be amended - still only looking at the terms of the legislation - no alternatives. #They can then - once altered - or even unaltered be reread to the parliament - more debate... then voting... still no alternatives. #When these guys actually vote, it's based on a YES/NO system... They dont get to say No I dont like that idea - I have a better suggestion - they only get to say yes or no to the terms of the legislation as outlined in said legislation. #
So... its not until the legislation is defeated are there opportunities for alternatives. #So how do we get it defeated - or better yet never discussed (changed) in the first place? #Yes the review is due - but they CAN adopt a do nothing approach...
We get them so scared that if they pass the new "green" rezonings that they will lose their seats at the next election. Currently they fear losing the "green" vote - we have to make them fear losing our vote... its the ONLY thing pollies understand and the motivation for their existence.
The environment minister doesnt care how many other good ideas are out there - she only cares about her own job and thats it.... period.
Give you an example - when the Feds tried to push through taxation reform (GST) there were 2 alternative proposals that were dismissed out of hand - even though both of these proposals returned more revenue to the Govt. and reduced waste and retape and paperwork. #The problem was if the Govt adopted these measures they would have to reduce the size of the Tax dept. Losing many senior public servants - so instead they increased the size of the Tax dept and the rest is history.
They dont care about us.... they only care about whats good for them and their mates - its sad but true. #So to say that we should focus on viable alternatives - is all interesting and I support many of the ideas - but its not actually going to help much.... to fight a bureaucracy - you have to know how they think and operate.... Let KC and the boys help guide you through this process. #
Continue to develop alternatives - but use them when the time is right - not now. #The time will be right when KC and the FP say it's right - they will know when to develop policy and know when to implement it - and that will be after they have legitimacy (see my other post) which is after they have someone in power - a senate or state seat. #It could happen sooner - if we are able to help them get enough support that the Govt fear us more than the Greens - but thats the ONLY way.
Sorry to rain on anyones parade - but it had to be said... lets get back on track.
thanks guys,
Adam